From gars@netcom.com Tue May 19 23:40:00 1998 Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 19:16:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Night Owl To: Internet Recipients of Wotanging Ikche Subject: Wotanging Ikche--nanews06.021 _ __ _____ __ _ __ ___ ____ _ __ ___ ' ) / / ') / / ) ' ) ) / ) / ' ) ) / ) / / / / / / /--/ / / / ___ / / / / ___ (_(_/ (__/ ( / (_ / (_ (___/ '__/_ / (_ (___/ ' O ____ _ , ___ _ , ___ O o O / ' ) / / ) ' ) / / ' O o O / /-< / /--/ /-- VOLUME 06, ISSUE 021 O o o o o O __/_ / ) (___/ / ( (___, May 23, 1998 O o O KANOHEDA ANIYVWIYA Otapi'sin Atsinikiisinaakssin O o O Es'te Opunvk'vmucvse ni-mah-mi-kwa-zoo-min Aunchemokauhettittea O ( N A T I V E A M E R I C A N N E W S ) This issue contains articles from Triballaw & Nat-Film Lists; Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty; UUCP email; Newsgroups: alt.native,soc.culture.native; http://serpiente.dgsca.unam.mx/jornada/conflicto.html Articles appearing have been previously posted for public dissemination and/or permission for inclusion has been secured. Letters of authorization are on file. A list of those granting permission to repost their words in this issue are listed at the end of part A. I thank each of you for allowing your words to be shared with the people. IMPORTANT!! ----------- To all who send copywrite protected articles, make very sure you have permission from the copywrite holder (a newspaper, the AP, a magazine, an author) because a new law is now in effect that says you can be prosecuted even if there is no monetary gain. Just because a newspaper has a website where it posts some or all of its editions does not grant permission for their redistribution. Be careful and be sure you pass on the items you do with full permission. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, all material appearing in this newsletter is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for educational purposes. <----<<<< >>>>----> This newsletter is a way of keeping the brothers and sisters who share our Spirit informed about current events within the lives of those who walk the Red Road. ++ It may be subscribed to via email by sending a request from your own internet addressable account to gars@netcom.com ++ It is archived at http://www.nanews.org Thanks to Borries Demeler all _Wotanging_Ikche_ (part a) submissions to AISESnet are archived under AISESnet and can be accessed easily by World Wide Web: 1994: http://aises.uthscsa.edu/94_dis.html 1995: http://aises.uthscsa.edu/95_dis.html 1996: http://aises.uthscsa.edu/96_dis.html 1997: http://aises.uthscsa.edu/97_dis.html This is a searchable index to the AISESnet Discussion mailing list database archive, and the keyword "Wotanging" will retrieve all issues for that year. Downloading Wotanging Ikche on AOL From: MAANG1419@aol.com Just thought I would share some info. I could not download on to a .txt because I kept getting the message (when I tried to retrieve it) that the text editor could not handle the volume. This time I downloaded it on to a .doc and when I retrieved it out of file manager, IT WORKED. "In early days we were close to nature. We judged time, weather conditions, and many things by the elements--the good earth, the blue sky, the flying of geese, and the changing winds. We looked to these for guidance and answers. Our prayers and thanksgiving were said to the four winds--to the East, from whence the new day was born; to the South, which sent the warm breeze which gave a feeling of comfort; to the West, which ended the day and brought rest; and to the North, the Mother of winter whose sharp air awakened a time of preparation for the long days ahead. We lived by God's hand through nature and evaluated the changing winds to tell us or warn us of what was ahead. Today we are again evaluating the changing winds. May we be strong in spirit and equal to our Fathers of another day in reading the signs accurately and interpreting them wisely. May Wah-Kon-Tah, the Great Spirit, look down upon us, guide us, inspire us, and give us courage and wisdom. Above all, may He look down upon us and be pleased." __ Unknown Speaker addressing the National Congress of American Indians in the mid 1960's (If any can tell me who to attribute this quote to, please do so. They are wise words. gary) +- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -+ | Indian Pledge of Allegiance | The Indian Pledge of Alleg- | | iance was first presented | I pledge allegiance to my Tribe,| on 2 December '93 during the | to the democratic principles | opening address of the Nat- | of the Republic | ional Congress of American | and to the individual freedoms | Indian Tribal-States Relat- | borrowed from the Iroquois and | ions Panel in Reno, NV. NCAI | Choctaw Confederacies, | plans distribution of the | as incorporated in the United | Indian Pledge to all Indian | States Constitution, | Nations. | so that my forefathers | | shall not have died in vain | Walk in Beauty! Night Owl +- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -+ O'siyo Brothers and Sisters! "Sovereign" is not such a difficult word to comprehend that it should require extensive and repeated explanation. Since it isn't all that hard to understand we are left with but two possible explanations for the continued failure to honor tribal sovereignty: 1 - The dominant society and those who serve as their governing bodies are just to ignorant to understand simple concepts, or 2 - They understand just fine and have neither the honor nor character to fulfil the obligations implicit in the term and agreements which refer to it. Likewise, treaties are supposedly legal and binding documents executed between two sovereign nations. The treaties are quite explicit in terms of what the obligations are for each participant. It may come as a great surprise to people like Senator Gorton to find there are no treaties between the United States and any First Nation with a phrase something to the effect of, "as long as I feel like it, or until you get a few dollars ahead." If you could wriggle out of a promissory note that way, and that's what treaties are - a series of legally binding promises - I can imagine all manner of people who would be overjoyed at the prospect of running to the local bank and saying, "Deal's off. You've got lots of money and I just don't see any reason I should keep throwing my hard earned money in that vault so your officers can run barefoot through it." It doesn't work that way, Senator. A deal is a deal. Accept it. Live with it. Get over it, and quit trying to screw the Indians out of what your government agreed to. =/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\= The language project I have started is moving very slowly, but it is moving. The need for this is a thing I truly believe. Without language a culture dies. What is said in any language seldom translates literally to another. It, at best, approximates the meaning. Our languages are dying. Our cultures will not linger long without our own words to describe the events in our lives, the ways passed down by our ancestors and our prophecies. I am collecting language resource information. Please send me all information each of you have regarding language resources. This should include all written teachings including dictionaries, grammar books and stories. Include all audio and video resources. Include the source, how it is distributed, the publisher, ISBN or other catalogue information that might be known. Include cost and current availability if you have it. Finally, include _your_ opinion. Is it good, bad, indifferent? I will keep this information, by language/nation and make what I have available to any who request it. Send what you can via email to gars@netcom.com You may also send info via snail mail to P O Box 672168. Marietta GA 30006. =/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\=/\= Thanks to Mike Wicks for the following reminder: In Memory (with Respect and Honor) AIM Casualties on Pine Ridge, 1973-1976 5.20.1975 Ben Sitting Up - AIM member killed at Wanblee by "unknown assailants." No investigation. Peace! Night Owl , , Gary Night Owl gars@netcom.com (*,*) P. O. Box 672168 gars@nanews.org (`-') Marietta, GA 30067, U.S.A. gars@igc.apc.org ===w=w=== gars@bellsouth.net Fax: 770-528-9643 gars@juno.com ----------- News of the people featured in this issue ---------- - Supreme Court Throws Out - U.S. Opposes Dump at Ward Valley Six Nations Council - LiL'Wat Traditionalist Jailed - Indian Sovereignty & Gorton - Supreme Court of Canada Denies - Consultation and Coordination Gustafsen Appeal Executive Order - BC's Bingogate - Utah Needs Reminding - Haida Case Targets - Religious Freedom BC Forest Tenure - One More Notch for Leonard - Canada's Rule of Law a Hoax - Les Francais pour - Plymouth Case Leonard Peltier - Re-Awakening of Mexica People - Largest Tribal Contribution - Done Time? Ever to NCAI - Native Prisoner - Selling our Ancestors Bones - A Hundred Years Ago - SNI Tribal Council Speaks Out - Poem: Heros - Special Request for Help - Verse: Hawaiian Book of Days - International Observers - The Healing Of The Spirit are Kidnapped Conference - Chiapas on Fire - Conferences and Powwows --------- "RE: Supreme Court Throws Out Six Nations Council" --------- Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 23:24:13 -0400 From: Kahn-Tineta Horn Subj: Supreme Court Throws Out Six Nations Indian Act Band Council UUCP email MNN. Mohawk Nation News. 15-May-98. The Six Nations Confederacy Council was violently thrown out of their council house by the RCMP in 1924. This was Canada's way of forcing the Iroquois to become a part of Canada. According to A.G. Chisholm, the lawyer for the Iroquois in 1920, the Six Nations were an independent British protectorate who were allies but not subjects of Britain. When the Department of Indian Affairs and the Prime Minister would not respect the law, the Six Nations changed to an American lawyer, Decker, to help them apply for admission to the League of Nations. They wanted to get the International Court to stop Canada from illegally imposing its laws on the Six Nations. Deskahe Levi General was chosen by the Six Nations to represent them in Europe. He got international attention and the backing of Holland, Persia, Panama, Estonia and Ireland. Canada prevented the application from getting a proper hearing through underhanded back room diplomacy. Canada was so scared of Deskahe's success that they acted rashly by brutally throwing the established Confederacy government out of the council house. This way they could claim that Deskahe did not represent the Six Nations and this is how they finally undermined the Six Nations government. Seventy-four years later the Indian Act band council stumbled ahead with Indian Affairs policy and developed a pseudo customary selection process to replace itself. This way the land would be turned over to them instead of being held in trust by the government, and they would have taxation powers. To do this they had to petition the Canadian government to be taken out of section 74 of the Indian Act which provides for the setting up of the band council system. They put in their new regime without even following the Indian Act procedures of consultation with the people. Sitting there in his log cabin with the crooked floors is Brian Maracle, who was smart enough to know what he saw. And he didn't like it. He wasn't consulted and he should have been. After doing a bit of research, he found out that the Indian Act band council's tactics were illegal. He got a lawyer, Owen Young, and fought them. He got his sister on board and showed what two ordinary people can do. It got into the Supreme Court of Canada. The Confederacy intervened and the Supreme Court ruled that what the band council had done was illegal. It told them to go home and clean up their act. So now here's the dilemma. To get the new customary council in place, the band council had to get Canada to revoke the order that brought them under section 74 of the Indian Act. Now the Supreme Court has said that the customary council is illegitimate and the old band council does not exist anymore. There is a vacuum in the Indian Act. Once they've opted out, they cannot opt back in. However, they have returned to the council house and are pretending to be the government. The Six Nations people certainly did not chose them. Canada does not recognize them. So who do they think they are? And what is Canada going to do this time? Will they be more civilized than they were in 1924? Under international law a government cannot be changed unless it is freely chosen by a majority of the people and the international community can't be hoodwink now like they were back in the 1920's. The majority of Six Nations people have never accepted that they are Canadians. The Confederacy council has continued to act despite Canada's refusal to recognize it. Is it time now for the council house to be taken back by the legitimate Six Nations government that has continued to operate despite Canada's insistence on dealing with its puppet Indian Act band council? Is this a golden opportunity to set things right? --------- "RE: Indian Sovereignty & Gorton" --------- Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:04:34 -0700 From: John Wm Sloniker Subj: Indian Sovereignty & Gorton This is about one of the "good" guys, if you can believe it. - John ===================================== Nation's tribes gather to combat Gorton's ideas on Indian sovereignty by Danny Westneat Seattle Times Washington bureau Thursday, Sept. 4, 1997 WASHINGTON - Last year, when the Nisqually River flooded over its banks at Franks Landing and destroyed a grade school for Indian children, tribal and school officials turned to the state's senior senator for help. And Slade Gorton delivered, they say, aggressively securing $1.8 million in this year's federal budget to rebuild the Wa He Lut Indian school, a kindergarten and middle school for 60 Native Americans from around South Puget Sound. "I can say that unless Slade Gorton had taken an interest, there would have been no money for this school," said Superintendent Tom Keefe. But at the same time Keefe was telling his story earlier this week, 230 tribal leaders from around the nation were heading to Capitol Hill to defend themselves, they say, from the latest barrage of anti-Indian policy proposed by the man many Native Americans have come to call the "new General Custer" - this same Sen. Gorton. Yesterday, the National Congress of American Indians convened an emergency meeting across the street from the Capitol solely to combat Gorton and two proposals he attached to a spending bill, proposals they claim are discriminatory and would seriously erode the Indian right to self-governance. One measure would cut off nearly a half of the federal money that flows to reservations unless tribal governments agree to waive sovereign immunity from civil lawsuits. The other seeks to distribute federal money to the 557 reservations based on need, potentially denying aid to some of the wealthier tribes, which have profits from casinos and other business ventures. "The only reason we are all here is Senator Gorton," said Henry Cagey, chairman of the Lummi Nation near Bellingham, motioning toward a banquet hall filled to standing-room status with tribal leaders. "He will take any chance he can get to attack our sovereignty. If anything, he has become more hard-line and anti-Indian and devious in his attacks on us, and he's been fighting us for as long as anyone can remember." First as a state representative, then as attorney general and now as a U.S. senator, Gorton consistently has opposed the state's Indian tribes as they have attempted during the past three decades to assert their unique legal rights. Most notably, as attorney general in the 1970s, he fought all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court the landmark ruling giving Indians a treaty right to a half of the state's salmon catch. Today, he is routinely called an "Indian fighter." His seeming obsession with Indian policy is linked by some to a grudge he allegedly carries for losing the salmon court case. When it comes to the nation's 2 million Indians, Gorton often is considered a racist at worst, an uncaring elitist at best. But is he really any of these things? As his latest proposals spark yet another uproar in Indian country, Gorton increasingly is faced with a question by critics and supporters alike: Why are you continuing to fight this fight? Some of those who know him well, including some of his fiercest opponents on Indian policy in the Senate, say Gorton is motivated not by some visceral dislike for Indians but by a deeply held conviction that federal legal policy toward Native Americans is unfair and elevates some rights of Indians above non-Indians. "This is not some personal vendetta of his," Sen. John McCain, R, Arizona, said yesterday shortly after bashing Gorton's proposals at the Indian Congress meeting. "He has a philosophical, intellectual difference with me and many others here about the nature of Indian treaties and what the federal government's responsibilities to the tribes should be," he said. "I think the treaties are very clear. They are solemn agreements in which we got their land and we agreed to treat them as nations as well as help provide for their health and education." Gorton said yesterday he does not want to cancel the treaties or eliminate the tribes' status as sovereign nations. He only wants civil rights and due process to exist equally both on and off the reservation. To illustrate the point, today Gorton was to be joined in a news conference by Bernard Gamache, the father of 18-year-old Jered Gamache, who was killed three years ago in Toppenish when his car was broadsided by a Yakama tribal police cruiser. The family cannot sue the tribe for damages in a state or federal court because the tribe has sovereign immunity. "Now is that fair?" Gorton asked yesterday in a Senate speech. "If you are injured by a New York City policeman, you can sue New York City. But if you are injured by a Yakama tribal policeman, you cannot sue the tribe." New York City and most other governments long ago waived sovereign immunity in such public-safety cases as a way of balancing the power of government with the rights of individual citizens. Gorton said later he is a firm believer in the right of Indian tribes to self-government and self-determination, but that Indian governments cannot be permitted to act in a "totally lawless fashion" and not be held responsible. "I just don't see how that is a racist view," he said. "I think cries of racism are an escape from having to argue the merits." Tribal leaders, however, seem as eager to argue the merits of Gorton's proposals as they are to question his personal motives. Forcing tribes to waive legal immunity is discriminatory because Congress does not force non-Indian governments to do the same, speakers at the Indian Congress meeting argued. And if Congress starts adjusting federal aid to tribes based on profits from casinos or other business ventures, why doesn't it also cut back on aid to states that run successful lotteries, they wondered. The notion that Gorton has intellectual or legalistic motivations for limiting the tribes' sovereign powers does not translate well in Indian country, where the cultural identity of the people is tightly wrapped up in the treaties their ancestors signed and the independent "nation" status they gained as a result, Indian leaders say. "It's like he's trying to take away who we are," said Cagey of the Lummi Nation. "He never makes any effort to understand us, or to try to work to make the relationship better. He just wants to end the relationship." Keefe, the Wa He Lut school superintendent and former staffer for Sen. Warren Magnuson, said he almost never agrees with Gorton or his methods but does not believe the senator's Indian policies are racist. "For him, the part about sovereignty is just another legal argument, and the part about limiting financial aid is his conservative desire to get the tribes to wean themselves from federal dependence," Keefe said. "It's very consistent with his approach to a whole range of issues that have nothing to do with Indians." Despite the pressure from fellow politicians, including a threatened filibuster by Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, and a threatened veto by the Clinton administration, Gorton vowed yesterday to fight on when the Interior appropriations bill reaches the Senate floor next week. He said the charges of racism don't bother him, although he seemed frustrated that he has become the Indians' Enemy No. 1. "I have always supported Indian tribes when it comes to their health and educational opportunities," he said. "What this is about is whether rights also carry with them responsibilities, such as supporting yourself and coexisting fairly with the rest of society. "It's an uphill struggle for me, but I'm generally content on matters of principle to present the arguments and let people think about them. More often than not, the better argument will carry the day." Danny Westneat's phone-message number is 202-662-7455. His e-mail address is: dwes-new@seatimes.com E-mail Comments to Editor; opinion@seatimes.com 1998 The Seattle Times Company : National News The Seattle Times home page http://www.seattletimes.com/ The Seattle Times: Search Archive http://www.seattletimes.com/extra/search.html The Seattle Times: Browse by date http://www.seattletimes.com/todaysnews/browse.html Copyright (c) 1998 The Seattle Times Company http://www.seattletimes.com/news/general/copyright.html --------- "RE: Consultation and Coordination Executive Order" --------- Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 00:05:26 -0500 From: hdqrs@worldnet.att.net Subj: Executive Order: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments For your info: The BIA still has the power to say which tribe is recognized. Please note this EO was issued when the President was in England. old jim http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/WH/Publications/html/Publications.html http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/retrieve-documents.html http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/uri-res/I2R?urn:pdi://oma.eop.gov.us/ 1998/5/15/10.text.1 THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary (Birmingham, England) ________________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release May 14, 1998 EXECUTIVE ORDER - - - - - - - CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION WITH INDIAN TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS The United States has a unique legal relationship with Indian tribal governments as set forth in the Constitution of the United States, treaties, statutes, Executive orders, and court decisions. Since the formation of the Union, the United States has recognized Indian tribes as domestic dependent nations under its protection. In treaties, our Nation has guaranteed the right of Indian tribes to self-government. As domestic dependent nations, Indian tribes exercise inherent sovereign powers over their members and territory. The United States continues to work with Indian tribes on a government-to- government basis to address issues concerning Indian tribal self-government, trust resources, and Indian tribal treaty and other rights. Therefore, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with Indian tribal governments in the development of regulatory practices on Federal matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities; to reduce the imposition of unfunded mandates upon Indian tribal governments; and to streamline the application process for and increase the availability of waivers to Indian tribal governments; it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order: (a) "State" or "States" refer to the States of the United States of America, individually or collectively, and, where relevant, to State governments, including units of local government and other political subdivisions established by the States. (b) "Indian tribe" means an Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of the Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian tribe pursuant to the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a. (c) "Agency" means any authority of the United States that is an "agency" under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5). Sec. 2. Policy making Criteria. In formulating policies significantly or uniquely affecting Indian tribal governments, agencies shall be guided, to the extent permitted by law, by principles of respect for Indian tribal self-government and sovereignty, for tribal treaty and other rights, and for responsibilities that arise from the unique legal relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribal governments. Sec. 3. Consultation. (a) Each agency shall have an effective process to permit elected officials and other representatives of Indian tribal governments to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities. (b) To the extent practicable and permitted by law, no agency shall promulgate any regulation that is not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the communities of the Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on such communities, unless: (1) funds necessary to pay the direct costs incurred by the Indian tribal government in complying with the regulation are provided by the Federal Government; or (2) the agency, prior to the formal promulgation of the regulation, (A) in a separately identified portion of the preamble to the regulation as it is to be issued in the Federal Register, provides to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a description of the extent of the agency's prior consultation with representatives of affected Indian tribal governments,a summary of the nature of their concerns, and the agency's position supporting the need to issue the regulation; and (B) makes available to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget any written communications submitted to the agency by such Indian tribal governments. Sec. 4. Increasing Flexibility for Indian Tribal Waivers. (a) Agencies shall review the processes under which Indian tribal governments apply for waivers of statutory and regulatory requirements and take appropriate steps to streamline those processes. (b) Each agency shall, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, consider any application by an Indian tribal government for a waiver of statutory or regulatory requirements in connection with any program administered by that agency with a general view toward increasing opportunities for utilizing flexible policy approaches at the Indian tribal level in cases in which the proposed waiver is consistent with the applicable Federal policy objectives and is otherwise appropriate. (c) Each agency shall, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, render a decision upon a complete application for a waiver within 120 days of receipt of such application by the agency. The agency shall provide the applicant with timely written notice of the decision and, if the application for a waiver is not granted, the reasons for such denial. (d) This section applies only to statutory or regulatory requirements that are discretionary and subject to waiver by the agency. Sec. 5. Cooperation in developing regulations. On issues relating to tribal self-government, trust resources, or treaty and other rights, each agency should explore and, where appropriate, use consensual mechanisms for developing regulations, including negotiated rulemaking. Sec. 6. Independent agencies. Independent regulatory agencies are encouraged to comply with the provisions of this order. Sec. 7. General provisions. (a) This order is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive branch and is not intended to, and does not, create any right, benefit, or trust responsibility, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a party against the United States, its agencies or instrumentalities, its officers or employees, or any other person. (b) This order shall supplement but not supersede the requirements contained in Executive Order 12866 ("Regulatory Planning and Review"), Executive Order 12988 ("Civil Justice Reform"), OMB Circular A-19, and the Executive Memorandum of April 29, 1994, on Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments. (c) This order shall complement the consultation and waiver provisions in sections 4 and 5 of the Executive order, entitled "Federalism," being issued on this day. (d) This order shall be effective 90 days after the date of this order. WILLIAM J. CLINTON THE WHITE HOUSE, May 14, 1998. --------- "RE: Utah Needs Reminding" --------- Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 13:19:54 -0700 (PDT) From: John Shafer Subj: Utes Boycott Roosevelt, Utah ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 11:52:00 -0700 From: bigots be gone Subj: Utah Needs Reminding It appears that once again, the State of Utah and in particular, Roosevelt City, needs reminding that the world is watching. Please review the following and send your response to: bigots-be-gone@mailexcite.com All responses will be forwarded to the appropriate offenders. Responses should state support for the Ute Nation's boycott; as well as mention the upcoming 2002 Winter Olympic games and what a "fine" example Utah and Roosevelt will present to the world. ************************** The Ute Bulletin The Official Newspaper of the Ute Indian Tribe May 13, 1998 Roosevelt Refuses to Negotiate with Its Neighbor By Sandy Hansen, Deputy General Counsel By a vote of three for and two against, the Roosevelt City Council decided on Tuesday, May 9 NOT to negotiate jurisdictional issues with the Ute Indian Tribe. Voting against the measure - and to continue negotiations with the Tribe - were City Council members Steve Yack and Mike Guinn. Mayor Dennis Jenkins, who is a non-voting member of the City Council, is also reported to have favored continuing to negotiate with the Tribe. The City Council's decision came as a surprise to members of the Tribal Business Committee. Just five days earlier, the B.B. had met with State, city and county officials to discuss the possibility of restoring to the Tribe jurisdiction over misdemeanor offenses committed by tribal members in Roosevelt and continuing to exempt tribal members from paying State and city sales taxes on purchases that they make in Roosevelt. At that meeting, Mayor Jenkins expressed optimism that an agreement with the Tribe could be worked out. His optimism was shared by Council Member Mike Guinn, who stated that, as neighbors, the Tribe and City should at least attempt to reach an agreement. Business Committee Chairman Ron Wopsock expressed some hope that the City Council's decision could be reversed. In the meantime, he urged tribal members to continue to boycott Roosevelt City with renewed enthusiasm. "The only bargaining ship that the Tribe and tribal members have is out economic clout. We need to show the City Council the full weight of that economic clout by taking our business to Vernal and other communities," the Chairman emphasized. Mr. Wopsock explained that the City Council has encouraged the State to collect six dollars on every $100 that tribal members spend in Roosevelt City. One dollar from each of those six dollars collected would be returned to the City. "By their vote last Tuesday night, a majority of the Roosevelt City Council indicated that the Tribe's concerns and tribal members' concerns are of no concern to Roosevelt City. I don't think that we should support, with our tax dollars, a City Council that is not interested even in hearing our concerns. Instead, I think we should spend our tax dollars elsewhere," the Chairman said. He continued, "The Roosevelt City Council thinks that they can make money off of tribal members, by taxing purchases that we make in Roosevelt. What we - as a Tribe and as tribal members - need to show them, by our actions, is that they will lose not only our tax dollars, but also the dollars that are generated by sales to tribal members. When they realize the 3,500 people are no longer buying groceries, auto parts, clothes and other items in Roosevelt, it MAY make them listen to those 3,500 people's concerns." Mr. Wopsock also commented that he did not think the City Council's decision reflected the desires of the majority of Roosevelt City's residents: "I think most people in Roosevelt believe that, as twin governments in this community, the Tribe and the City Council should try to work out our differences. I would encourage all residents of the City who do share that view to communicate it to the City Council members, and to persuade them to come back to the negotiating table with the Tribe," commented the Chairman. Mr. Wopsock said that the Tribe will continue to negotiate jurisdictional issues with Duchesne and Uintah Counties and the State. ********************** Uintah Basin Standard Tues. May 12, 1998 Roosevelt, Utah City votes against relinquishing jurisdiction over tribal members By Lezlee E. Whiting A boycott of all Roosevelt businesses put into motion by the Ute Indian Tribe last September has had the opposite effect the tribe had hoped it would have - the 8-month old economic sanctions failed to push the Roosevelt City Council into returning criminal misdemeanor jurisdiction over tribal members back to the Ute Tribe, or agree to continue to allow tribal members to remain except from sales tax in the city. A 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling issued last May removed Roosevelt from the Ute reservation and gave the city jurisdiction over tribal members. Roosevelt Mayor Dennis Jenkins expressed frustration at the outcome of a 3 to 2 vote held last Tuesday, May 5 that vetoed further jurisdiction negotiations with the tribe. "I'm extremely disappointed. I feel this will take the city in a different direction than we wanted to go. I feel this will have far-reaching effects on our tax base and won't help relations with the tribe," Jenkins stated. As mayor Jenkins only has a vote if a city Council member is absent and his vote is need to break a tie. Council members Beverly Hansen, Sterling Rees and Roger Dart voted against continuing negotiations with the tribe over the criminal jurisdiction and sales tax issues. They said the tribe's decision to penalize Roosevelt businesses because they were upset when a federal court judge lifted an injunction which prohibited the city from exercising jurisdiction, didn't help matters. The tribe has also threatened further economic sanctions against the city if they failed to enter into negotiations. Council members Steve Yack and Mike Guinn voted in favor of continuing negotiation discussions with the tribe. Hansen and Ress had already announced their opposition to surrendering criminal jurisdiction, but Dart who was undecided a week ago, was the swing vote. "I admit I ran the gamut of emotions. I was torn, but the bottom line was that I represent 5,000 citizens of Roosevelt and we should not and cannot compromise our jurisdiction and code of law and order in any way, shape or form. To do so would have been a great injustice, " Dart stated. He also said he felt that having two sets of rules for different races would "eventually cause the chasm of mistrust and prejudice to grow wider and deeper." Dart said since the vote was made public he's had positive feedback from his constituents. "I've heard from more people pleased with the decision than who haven't been." He expressed frustration with the State for not lending guidance in the matter, but said he still believes there are positive things that can happen between the tribe and city, particularly when it comes to economic development. Hansen said she based her decision not only on the legal aspects of court ruling and the morals of the issue, but also on the concerns and desires related to her by the citizens of Roosevelt. "These citizens are the people I represent. My commitment will always be to treat everyone fairly and equally within Roosevelt city. I feel that we can all still live as friends in an atmosphere of mutual respect for each other," she stated. On the opposite end of the issue, Guinn said he's heard only negative comments from those upset with the outcome of the vote. Guinn and Yack were the only City Council member to attend a negotiating meeting in Salt Lake with the tribe, counties and state late last month. Guinn said he felt the positive dialogue at the meeting was proof the issues could have been worked out. "Roosevelt is a unique area because we are technically in the center of a reservation, therefore we have to be conscientious of what will work for both of us without compromising public safety." Guinn said he favored a resolution that would have allowed city police to arrest and detain tribal members accused of misdemeanors, but then allow the tribe to prosecute their own members in tribal court where their punishment would be determined by the Ute Tribe Law and Order Code. "But as far as I'm concerned this (the vote) isn't the end of our conversations with the tribe, it's just the beginning. I'm still an optimist." Ute Tribe members have been exempt from paying sales tax in Roosevelt and throughout Duchesne and west Uintah counties since 1986 when the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the exterior boundaries of the original Uintah Valley Reservation were not diminished when Congress opened the reservation for homesteading. Under federal law Native Americans are exempt from sales tax on purchases made on the reservation. A 1994 Supreme Court ruling removed Roosevelt city and homestead land in the tow counties from the reservation. Following that ruling the city was given criminal jurisdiction over tribal members charged with felonies but not misdemeanor crimes. The Utah State Tax Commission declined to remove the sales tax exemption due to pending litigation. Last May, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed the original boundaries of the Uintah Valley Reservation were left intact by Congress in the early 1900s, but at the same time they concurred that 1994 Supreme Court ruling removed homestead land from the reservation. Roosevelt city is comprised entirely of homestead land. About 50 percent of Duchesne and west Uintah County is homestead land as well. With the Appeals Court ruling in hand, last September the city petitioned Federal Court Judge Bruce Jenkins to lift the injunction which prohibited them from exercising misdemeanor jurisdiction over tribal members, along with the sales tax exemption. The judge granted their request based on the court rulings. Although the misdemeanor criminal jurisdiction took effect in September, Ute Tribe members who purchase goods in Roosevelt remain sales tax exempt. Even though the Business Committee consistently agreed that Roosevelt was off the reservation even prior to the lifting of the injunction, the day after it was lifted the Business Committee announced a boycott of all Roosevelt businesses by the tribal government and urged tribal members to take their business elsewhere as well. The tribe said they enacted the boycott because they were unaware Roosevelt was going to have the injunction lifted. The Ute Tribe Business Committee would only comment through a press release which was not available at press time. ******************** Uintah Basin Standard Letters to Editor City Council praised for courageous decision Dear Editor, I would like to publicly thank the members of the Roosevelt City Council who had the courage of their convictions to vote NOT to give up any law enforcement jurisdiction to the Ute Tribe. This decision is undoubtedly the single most important vote ever taken in the entire history of the City of Roosevelt. I would like members of the Ute Tribe to know that this decision in no way affects our many personal relationships and friendships that many of us have with you and that we have no bad feelings toward any of you. Thank You Virginia M. Nielsen --------- "RE: Religious Freedom" --------- Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 11:15:16 -0500 From: arthurmiller50@juno.com (Arthur J Miller) Subj: Religious Freedom Religious Freedom The House passed legislation that would require the U.S. to impose economic sanctions against countries that practice religious persecution. Now would it not be interesting if Native people used this law, if this bill became law, that the government, either state government or federal government, when it practices religious persecution, demand that sanctions be applied? Native people in state prisons could demand sanctions against states. Though we know the government will not place sanctions on themselves, if it were played up big it could be a real eye opener. Indeed, it would! Actually, government is SUPPOSED to be subject to the same laws to which anyone is subject. However, the problem, I guess, lies with the failure on the part of most people to make sure government stays in line. ("It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." - U. S. Supreme Court in American Communications Association v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382, 442. ) By our (collective) silence, we permit this sort of crap. Silence is consent. No one who has failed to go on record officially (by somehow communicating their wishes to those who represent us: congressmen and other elected people) should complain about the way things are. In generally addressing all who might read this message--and I hope that is a great number of citizens who might be compelled to let the folks on Capitol Hill hear from them once they realize that their silence consents to all the horrible things that are going on, not only with Native Americans' rights, but with ANY matter of importance to them--I would like to urge you to SPEAK UP. It doesn't matter whether the issue is religious rights of anyone, or Native Americans, or what it is. The point is, don't give your consent to the atrocities inflicted on citizens by government by keeping silent about it. Just in case you are wondering (and I surely would wonder, if someone said these things to me), yes, I DO speak up--so much that I have gained a reputation as a pain in the lower posterior. Nevertheless, I have made my wishes known to state, city and congressional representatives in all areas. I never consented to any limitations on religious freedom; never consented to Ruby Ridge, Wounded Knee, Waco's Inferno, or just about anything the federal, state, county, or municipal government has done in the last 25 or so years. If EVERYONE ceased to consent (by silence), it WOULD have a great impact, guaranteed. Remember: we ELECT them, and elections are a good way to be heard, too. By the way, I correspond with Standing Deer, the man whom the feds hired to off Leonard Peltier, in the federal joint at Marion, Illinois. Standing Deer and Leonard Peltier have religious freedom--so long as the religion is approved by the government, that is, and of course, the spiritual practices of Native Americans are not on the approved list. And you know what happens when the government doesn't approve of a religion, because we all saw a good example of that on April 19, 1993. Speak up, please. --------- "RE: One More Notch for Leonard" --------- Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 19:55:17 -0400 From: not@inthe.game (justanoldman) Subj: One more notch for Leonard.. Newsgroup: alt.native Whew! Finally, after over a year & a half of lobbying... All of the inserts [...] are mine. At 3:02PM EDST today, during Question Period on the floor of the House of Commons of Canada... ----------------CUT HERE ----------------------------- COMMUNIQUE! From The New Democratic Party of Canada FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 11 MAY 1998 NDP CALLS ON JUSTICE MINISTER TO RELEASE LEONARD PELTIER REVIEW THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, OTTAWA The internal review into the wrongful extradition of leonard Peltier must be made public, NDP justice critic Peter Mancini said today. "It took almost two decades before a review into the extradition of Mr. Peltier was undertaken and years more to complete," said Mancini. "The treatment of Mr. Peltier by this and former governments is a national disgrace." Leonard Peltier was deported [by way of an extradition order] to the United States in 1976 on the basis of false and fabricated information to stand trial for the murder of two FBI agents. Many groups and individuals from around the world have [since] been actively lobbying for the release of Mr. Peltier, including the European Parliament, the Belgian Parliament, Amnesty International, Nelson Mandela, Jesse Jackson and Robert Redford, [among 35,000,000 others including 5 Nobel Laureates & no less than 19 national governments worldwide]. "In 1995 then-Justice Minister Allan Rock authorized a full review of the case and in february of 1997 indicated the findings would be made public prior to the June '97 election. The Liberals have not kept their promise," Mancini said. "The Liberal government has a responsibility to make public all of the facts so justice can finally be done." REPLY OF THE HON. ANNE MCLELLAN, MINSISTER OF JUSTICE AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF CANADA "Mr. Speaker, I can assure the honourable member that we are reviewing that report right now in relation to privacy concerns. As soon as I am satisfied and the privacy commissioner is satisfied that we can release that report I will do so." ---------------------- CUT HERE --------------------------------- I strongly suggest that all of Leonard's supporters convey their personal thanks to Peter Mancini for both raising this question in the House of Commons as well as putting the following Formal Motion on record... (it'll never make it to a vote before dying on the Order Paper when the House goes into recess, but it IS on record...) Motion - Moved by Peter Mancini, Hon Member for Sydney-Victoria, [ I think seconded by Gordon Earle, Hon. Member for Halifax West], That this House condemn as unacceptable, the extradition of Leonard Peltier to the United States from Canada on the basis of false information filed with a Canadian court by American authorities, and that this House calls on the government to seek the immediate return of Mr. Peltier to Canada. You can email that thanks to Peter Mancini at: mancini.p@parl.gc.ca masi:cho... --------- "RE: Les Francais pour Leonard Peltier" --------- Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 21:51:01 -0400 From: not@inthe.game (justanoldman) Subj: Les francais pour Leonard Peltier Newsgroup: alt.native Leonard Peltier Support Group - France (LPSG-France) The LPSG-France was established in Paris in 1978, after French people met representatives of the American Indian Movement (AIM) and the International Indian Treaty Council (IITC) at the first United Nations' NGO Conference on Indigenous Peoples Rights. It was created to support the claim for freedom for Native American Political Prisoner Leonard "Gwarth-ee-Lass" Peltier and to inform and lobby the French public and political representatives about his case. The LPSG-France is part of the French NGO : Committee in Solidarity with Native Peoples of the Americas (CSIA), which main goal is to work in solidarity with Indigenous Peoples and organizations from North, Central and South America. In 1984, knowing that it was difficult to raise awareness among the European public, Gilbert Pilot (Innu from Canada) suggested that the CSIA creates a magazine to spread the information about the Indian Peoples' struggles. He named it after his traditional territory: Nitassinan (which means "our land"). Ever since, the CSIA/LPSG-France has been combining information and actions, always working upon specific demands addressed to us by Indigenous representatives. We are still using this magazine to inform about the development of Leonard's case and about the situation of Native American Prisoners in the US and Canada. To support Leonard Peltier, the LPSG-France is working in coordination with the LPDC-International Office and its International Spokesperson, with the LPDC-Canada and the LPSG Support Network (especially in Europe). We have also worked with other Indigenous organizations involved in solidarity with Leonard such as : The "Bring Peltier Home Campaign", the American Indian Movement... We inform the French public and press about Leonard's case by publishing Nitassinan (quarterly magazine), organize tours and conferences with Indigenous delegates, participate in cultural events such as festivals, etc. These events are very often the occasion to ask the public to participate actively in the solidarity with Leonard Peltier and to collect signatures for his release. We also work at informing and lobbying the local, national and international political representatives. We have for example addressed Leonard's issue to the French Parliament, the French Parliament's Commission on Foreign Affairs, the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs as well as to the European Parliament and we have gathered through the years over 350 support resolutions from City Councils for freedom for Leonard. The CSIA/LPSG-France also participates in international forums such as the UN "Working Group on Indigenous Peoples", the UN "Commission on Human Rights", the "International Meeting against Neoliberalism" (Berlin & Chiapas, 1996), the "International Meeting of American Indian Communities" (French Parliament, Paris - June 1996), meetings of the "European Alliance for Leonard Peltier", "Euromeetings of Native American Support Groups", etc. Each year since 1981, the CSIA/LPSG-France has been organizing in Paris the "International Day in Solidarity with Native American Peoples" around October 12th. And since 1992, the LPSG-France is organizing actions in solidarity with Leonard Peltier (demonstration, visit to US Embassy, Conference, etc.), coordinated at a European and international level, every February 6th (day of Leonard's arrest in Canada), June 26th (International Peltier Day) and December 10th (International Human Rights Day). The LPSG-France was mandated by Bobby Castillo (LPDC International Spokesperson) in 1991 to coordinate the campaign in France and our organization participated in the creation of the European Alliance for Leonard Peltier-EALP (November 1994). From 1978 till today, LPSG-France has organized tours and conferences for LPDC representatives (Stephanie Peltier, Mark Banks, Linda Azure, Bobby Castillo). In November/December 1995, we have organized a successful national tour with Bobby Castillo, which allowed to obtain a major reaction from French officials to Leonard's transfer from Leavenworth. Bobby also met with Mr. Lionel Jospin (now Prime Minister of France) who asked President Clinton for Executive Clemency for Leonard. In 1992, CSIA/LPSG-France has strengthened its solidarity work with Leonard, in the frame of the Campaign "500 years of Indigenous, Black and Popular Resistance". We have co-organized two Runs (Paris-Albertville-Geneva/UN, February 1992, and Paris-Barcelona, June/July 1992) with Indigenous Representatives from North and Latin America (among them, Ammon Russell, AIM member, Dineh from Big Mountain, who had received a mandate from Bobby Castillo to represent Leonard Peltier). Later, the CSIA/LPSG-France participated in the organization of the "Walk for Human Rights" (crossing 50 towns around Paris), June 1995 (with Bobby Castillo) and the "Freedom Run for Leonard Peltier and All Indigenous Peoples" (June/July 1996) across Europe (France, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Poland Czech Republic, Slovakia, Switzerland/UN). Ammon Russell, who participated in it, was mandated by the LPDC International Office to present once again Leonard's issue, Frank Dreaver (LPDC-Canada) and Bruce Ellison also joined for a part of the Run. The CSIA/LPSG-France 's lobby effort has allowed the Peltier representatives visiting France to meet several major personalities and to obtain official statements from Mayors, Members of the Parliament, City Councils and important NGOs. For examples : - support from Mr. Lionel Jospin (now Prime Minister of France) - support from Mr. Jack Lang (President of the French Parliament's Foreign Affairs Commission) - support from Mrs. Danielle Mitterrand (former First Lady of France and President of "Foundation France Liberte"). A major work has been done with Bobby Castillo, which resulted in the support from several French Members of Parliament (from various political parties) and an official question about Peltier's case at the French Parliament (November 14th, 1994). Another question to the French Government is under procedure. Planned Actions Currently, the LPSG-France is continuing the lobby at the French Parliament and at the European Parliament in coordination with KOLA/LPSG-Belgium. We are working together to build up a strong LPSG European Network. The LPSG-France plans to organize for June 26th, 1998, a benefit concert, an exhibition of the paintings of Leonard Peltier, Fernando Caro and Luis Rodriguez (and lithos of Laurie White Hawk, if she agrees...) and to go to the US Embassy with French political representatives. MUCH MORE HAS BEEN DONE ! We'll send you a detailed report of our actions later The CSIA/LPSG-France also supports among others : The Big Mountain Dineh People, the San Carlos Apache People's struggle to save Mount Graham, the Innuat's (Quebec and Labrador) fight against NATO low level flights, Hydro-Quebec damming projects and mining, the Lubicon Cree People's struggle, Mohawk Nation's claims for sovereignty, the Dene and Cree Peoples from Northern Saskatchewan affected by uranium mining, the Indigenous Peoples of Mexico (especially Chiapas) and Guatemala, French Guiana's Indian Peoples for the recognition of their Indigenous rights by the French Government, the Makuxi and Yanomami Peoples of Roraima (Brazil), the Mapuche from Chile and Argentina, etc. The CSIA also works in coordination with other non Indigenous human rights and environmental organizations in Europe and in the Americas in order to strengthen the lobby effort and to secure the results through common actions. Leonard Peltier Support Group - France c/o Nitassinan CSIA B.P. 372 75526 Paris Cedex 11 - France Phone : (33 1) 43 73 05 80 Fax : (33 1) 43 72 15 77 (Attn : Nitassinan-CSIA) Email : hdoreau@aw.sgi.com --------- "RE: Largest Tribal Contribution Ever to NCAI" --------- Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 12:49:23 EDT From: FirehairSS Subj: Lrgst Tribal Contribution ever to NCAI ------- FORWARD, Original message follows ------- From: AOL News Subj: Largest Tribal Contribution Ever to National Congress of... Largest Tribal Contribution Ever to National Congress of American Indians Prairie Island Tribe Donates $200,000 to Fight for Sovereignty RED WING, Minn., May 15 /PRNewswire/ -- The Prairie Island Indian Community has donated $200,000 to the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI). It is the largest tribal contribution in NCAI's 54 year history. The $200,000 gift was in response to an appeal NCAI issued seeking support in their fight to protect tribal sovereignty. NCAI President Ron Allen said, "The Prairie Island Indian Community has stepped forward and bolstered NCAI's capacity to defend sovereignty for all tribes across the nation. We're grateful for this extraordinary gift and encourage other tribes to lend their support to the degree their resources allow. We're facing hostile legislation in Congress on several fronts and need all the support we can generate." The Prairie Island Indian Community runs Treasure Island Resort & Casino. Employing more than 1,300 people, the tribe is the largest employer in Goodhue County, and just recently donated one-third of the funds needed to help build a new ice arena in Red Wing. "We are fortunate to be in a position to give back to the community, and use our resources to benefit other tribes that are not as prosperous" said Tribal President Audrey Kohnen. "Our charitable giving focuses on a variety of areas, but we are particularly proud to be a part of NCAI's national fight for tribal sovereignty. Without sovereignty our entire community and business would be threatened, as the largest employer in the area, the loss of our business would have a tremendous negative impact on all of our neighboring communities. " NCAI will recognize the Prairie Island Community's generosity at the organization's convention in Wisconsin, June 14-17, 1998. NCAI President Allen said, "The Prairie Island Indian Community has set a sterling precedent by utilizing their new resources for the benefit of all tribes." The National Congress of American Indians, founded in 1944, is the oldest, largest and most representative national Indian organization. NCAI serves the needs of a broad membership of American Indian and Alaska Native governments by advocating on their behalf before Congress and the Administration, including many federal agencies. SOURCE Prairie Island Indian Community CO: Prairie Island Indian Community ST: Minnesota --------- "RE: Selling our Ancestors Bones" --------- From: FirehairSS Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:50:29 EDT Subj: Selling our Ancestors Bones, what to do ------- FORWARD, Original message follows ------- Date: Mon, May 11, 1998 1:18 AM EDT From: ApacheMa1 Ashoge Wasawa Tall Trees for sharing this with us all. Blessings, ApacheMa In a message dated 10/5/1998 6:01:59 AM, you wrote: <> --------- "RE: SNI Tribal Council Speaks Out" --------- Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:44:08 EDT From: FirehairSS Subj: SNI Tribal Council speaks out ------- FORWARD, Original message follows ------- With many thanks to Bonny for taking her time to send on these articles!!! Date: Wed, May 6, 1998 9:02 AM EDT From: Bonny >From the Salamanca Press Tuesday May 5, 1998 SNI Tribal Council to push legal action against those who intimidated President JIMERSONTOWN - The Seneca Nation's Tribal Council voted Monday to officially condemn and pursue charges against some members of a group that pressured President Michael Schindler into nullifying Saturday's gaming referendum and resigning his CEO duties. Schindler said he had left a dinner on the Cattaraugus Reservation and stopped by his William Seneca Building office to speak with a reporter when the group entered his office. The group demanded that he sign an executive order nullifying the gaming referendum, resign as chief executive officer and appoint Tribal Councilor Wayne Jones to CEO position. He signed it then under duress, but rescinded the executive order on Monday. "There were people saying I couldn't leave. We'll stay here all night we've stayed here a long time before I was under duress. I was feeling threatened. I was told I couldn't leave the room. I figured well, we'll sign it and get out of here," said Schindler. One woman, identified by Nation officials as Gail Button, attempted to cut Schindler's hair, as an act of humiliation, and another man stuck the president. Tribal Councilor Rosemary Patterson said that even if Schindler didn't choose to seek legal action himself, the Council would. Councilors sentiments were explained in the resolution passed Monday, "The events of May 2, 1998 that took place in the William Seneca building following the referendum and were video taped by the news media and shown on the news station were unlawful and are condemned by the council of the the Seneca Nation of Indians. The Council now understands that the people involved in the event used intimidation and threats against the president of the Seneca Nation and forced him to sign the documents voiding the referendum and resigning as the administrator of the Nation "The President is the representative of all of the people and is the one individual who is recognized as the leader of the Nation. He was assaulted in his official capacity as president and it is as if the people of the Nation were assaulted. The behavior of the few cannot be allowed to practice politics through intimidation. We are a nation of laws and those laws protect all of the people regardless of the position they may have on a particular issue When these procedures are ignored then we have anarchy or the absence of law." The council directed legal counsel to contact the United States' Attorney's office and the New York State Attorney General to initiate criminal action against anyone who may have been involved in criminal conduct in connection with the incident, Mike Zabel, a spokesman for the state attorney general's office in Buffalo, said that agency has not yet been contacted as of this morning. A formal complaint must be made and prosecutorial arrangements would be made through the Erie County district attorney before the attorney general would become involved. "If contacted, we stand ready to assist," said Zabel. Councilors said they considered impeachment proceedings against Councilor Susan Abrams, who they said was present and "participated in the intimidation of the president," but no action has been taken against her at this time. Abrams said she was not in the room throughout the incident, but was, at times in the hallway, taking to reporters. She denied calling television camera crews to the scene and said Schindler was free to leave at will. Abrams was fired from her job as assistant to the president's office in January over disagreements with Schindler on the Gambling issue. "I told him he could leave anytime he wanted. He was free to go. We were not threatening him. The attempt to cut his hair was an act of humiliation, because he betrayed his people by allowing the referendum. It was not an assault." Said Abrams. Nation employees involved in the incident will be terminated, said Patterson. Saturday's incident has raised safety concerns among some Nation employees working at the William Seneca Building and residents living nearby. Schindler said, "We will be hiring another 10 marshals temporarily to have on site at the William Seneca Building to help ensure the employees of their safety and a lot of the residents at the Oak Tree, our (senior citizens') home are very concerned as well. We just want to show them we are very concerned about their safety and the additional marshals will be there for that purpose." --------- "RE: Special Request for Help" --------- Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:02:42 -0700 (PDT) From: AIMNJSG@webtv.net (AIMNJSG) Subj: Special request for help! Mailing List: TRIBALLAW (triballaw@thecity.sfsu.edu) The New Jersey Support group for the American Indian Movement has run into a brick wall with the State Board of Education again. Yesterday we contacted the board to provide them with the list of speakers we have currently lined up as we were asked to do 1 week prior to May 20. The secretary informed us that we are not permitted to speak at the May 20th meeting because they decided that is no longer an open topic forum. However, if we were willing to talk on one of the two topics they plan to discuss we would be welcome to speak. If you recall this occurred on March 18th after the February meeting we tried to go before the board and were informed that it was not an open topic forum and that we would have to wait until May 20th. I am sure you can see and feel our frustration. We had Ken Sterns and Gary Brouse lined up to be speakers. At the moment we have people reaching out to the State Board of Education in an attempt to pull strings and return favors and get us on their agenda. However, if that does not work, we will still be attending the meeting on May 20th. We plan on coming prepared to speak. We will be issuing a press release stating that we will be holding a PRESS conference outside the New Jersey Department of Education offices on May 20th. At which time we will address our topics and concerns to the media directly I need to ask at this time if you are in the New Jersey area or if you can get to the New Jersey area we would like your help and assistance at this meeting as a speaker or as a person willing to support us in our efforts. I ask that you arrive at the meeting by 2:30 p.m. to help fill the first few front rows. If you plan on attending the AIM meetings in NY that weekend we are directly in your path if you are coming from the south and would be happy to provide housing while you are here for the meeting. This is just another sign of the oppression that The New Jersey Department of Education seems to find acceptable in regards to Native American Issues. We will not allow our freedom of speech to be denied on May 20th. Suggestions are always welcome...... Thanks for your time Lee Ann Brown 609-371-1078 --------- "RE: International Observers are Kidnapped" --------- Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:57:56 -0400 From: pc93 Subj: english translation of International Observers are Kidnapped - please distribute UUCP email International Observers are Kidnapped Translated from Spanish by PC93 http://www.wilder.net/c73/index.htm or soon to be updated mirror http://nni.irdg.com/pc93 Mon, 11 May 1998 03:24:04 -0400 To the national and international public opinion: Is has been only a few minutes ago that we have spoken via telephone with Federico Mariani, the voice of the caravan, and almost textually his words have been "we are kidnapped in the airport, without being able to eat, because they have not allowed us to receive food, and with only water to drink, which they had allowed our embassy to give us. After all the lies that the Mexican government through Migration has told us during all the afternoon and night we no longer know under what conditions we are going to be able to leave Mexico." It is 2 in the morning on the 11th of May, in the city of Mexico; we have been accompanying the international observers of the Italian delegation during all the day and this is our report: The history has been more or less the following: Around 6 in the evening, the second group of the caravan (we would like it to be remembered that the first group traveled the 9th of May to Europe) gathered in the airport, with the promise that it had already been arranged, in negotiations between Migration and the embassy, that they would be able to leave the country, maintaining their migratory status of international observers, without any sanction and before expiration of the use of their visas, that is to say, at twelve at night. The time was passing and this supposed agreement did not concretize. They said that there were only technical problems in finding sufficient seating arrangements on the flights. Close to 8 in the evening it appeared that everything was fixed and it was hoped that 8 observers would be travelling by Iberia, 11 by Air France and 38 by Lufthansa. But, when the international observers directed themselves to the check-ins to register their flight, it resulted that there was not any places for them. There opened a new compass of delay in which representatives of the caravan, representatives from the embassy and representatives of the Mexican government met together. To the edge of 10 at night, a new agreement appeared to be reached: the international observers traveled in only one group. Then, they took their luggage, we took leave of them and we saw them pass through room D of the airport. Minutes afterwards, we received a via telephone the news that a new deception was keeping the international observers grounded. We transferred ourselves of new account to the airport and found the group of caravaners in one of the waiting rooms of the airport, surrounded by tens of agents of migration. The plane they were going to board never existed, for which reason they had decided to return to the waiting room, and there they found said police unfoldment. It was getting close to 12 at night, their visas were going to expire and they feared that the detachment of the police was going to attack them with detentions, under the pretext of their visas expiring. Then, the observers put themselves to travel to the Italian embassy (at the other end of the city) to stay the night there and to look for a new flight in the morning. They entered again the areas of restricted access of the airport, where there was supposed to be a bus ready to transfer them to the embassy. But they did not leave there yet. After a time, the only contacts that we have had were with functionaries of the embassy that left and entered. From them we learned that the Mexican government continues making obstacles to the exit of the international observers from the country, apparently with the intention that they leave, but with the qualification of being deported. The last that we have learned, like we pointed to at the beginning, is that the observers are found with the qualification of being kidnapped, without being able to leave for the embassy because a police detachment impedes them, without being able to have food, accompanied by functionaries of the Italian embassy that continue negotiating with the Mexican authorities the terms of their exit from the country. We will continue informing, although we await as well that in the proximate hours, with the appearance of the newspapers of May 11th, the informative labor will be more fluid. Ulises Martinez, of the International Commission of the FZLN ___________________________________________________ NUEVO AMANECER PRESS- N.A.P. _________________________________ Non Profit news agency.Translating and distributing information in support of the work in defense of human rights. Registered as a Non Profit Corporation in USA. Advisory team: Mexico. General Director:Roger Maldonado-Mexico Darrin Wood- Director NAP-Spain office Susana Saravia (formerly Anibarro)Coordinator Mexico/USA office our address: amanecer@aa.net Our web page in spanish:http://www.nap.cuhm.mx/nap0.htm *Working for Justice, so Peace may come.* --- Parar la Guerra en Chiapas - Stop the War in Chiapas -> http://www.wilder.net/c73/index.htm -> <- http://www.peak.org/~joshua/fzln <- http://www.newhumans.com/chiapas/automail.html --------- "RE: Chiapas on Fire" --------- Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 06:21:37 -0700 From: "Monique J. Lemaitre" Subj: [Fwd: Hermann Belinghausen:""("La Jornada", 13-5-98)] > http://serpiente.dgsca.unam.mx/jornada/conflicto.html -------------------------------------------------------- La Jornada--May 13, 1998 Unparalleled Proliferation of Fires in the Conflict Zone Hermann Bellinghausen, correspondent, Altamirano, Chis., May 12. "Fiiirre, fiiiirre", the voices of the men can be heard in the communities, being called to take machetes, shovels and pails, because the mountainside burns. Outside of all precedent, an epidemic of fires razes--besides forests--the vegetables, coffee plantations, fields and animals of the towns. The fire seems incited more than the times. It begins in places no one burns for agricultural use. It puts an end to forests that nobody dared fell, that was part of the patrimony of its towns. It doesn't respect ditches nor protection because the hand that lights it doesn't rest, it is ubiquitous, invisible, unpunished, and it has stripped the surface. In order to see the face of all, so that nobody hides. Never before has a layer of smoke covered such an expanse of the Chiapas territory. The peasants are astonished, indignant, sad and worried. Although the officials attempt some acrobatics in order to accuse the peasants of the damages (as was the case of the coffee fields set on fire in Taniperlas), they are accusations that nobody believes. In the narrow canyon of Altamirano there are places where, at noon, another person is no longer distinguished at two meters, like in the communities 10 de Abril and San Miguel Chiptic. But something more serious: in the narrow canyon of Patihuitz, the mountains of Corralchen, from Morelia to La Garrucha, burns. From all parts the smoke is discharged. Officially, up to now, 46,000 hectares were set on fire in Chiapas. Also officially, at this moment 35 fires are being fought. The largest, in the rainforest and the border. In the region of the lakes of Montebello, between La Trinitaria and La Independencia, 3,000 hectares burn. In the Taniperla public land, 1,200. In Tila, in the northern zone between Pueblo Nuevo and Sitala, the Capalna hillside burns. The disaster damaged the national park of Palenque and big forested expanses of Las Margaritas, Chanal and Comitan. In the region of El Bosque and Bochil, between the highlands and the north, the fire jumps where less waits for it. And in Chenalho. These are not the traditional burns of the agricultural cycle. Neither is it that the natives have become more careless, or that they shelter bad intentions. For the towns, the fires are the announcement of hunger. Except for the big fires of Copainala and Cintalapa, and those one could associate with the urban speculation, like in Ocozocuautla, the greatest concentration of fire coincides with what's termed the "conflict zone," that is to say, where the indigenous population lives, where there are autonomous municipalities, where hundreds of communities in resistance, the EZLN and their bases of support, move. Without the existence of proof in this respect (which is typical), this incendiary proliferation in zones of conflict is "normal" during campaigns of counterinsurgency. Wasn't this seen in Central America, Vietnam and Cambodia? Isn't it seen in Colombia and Indonesia? Why wouldn't we see it in Chiapas, if the manuals are the same? And there are so many fires in the Republic, that a few more wouldn't draw much notice. We Stopped Them in the Morning The roads that lead to Morelia, to Belisario Dominguez, to the mountains, glow desolately. The inhabitants of Morelia speak sadly of the lost landscape. Coughs, inflamed eyes, the children's running noses, lung pain, excessive phlegm, sore noses. The clothes smell of fireplace the whole time. "The fire appears as apportions [como repartida]," indicates a peasant. "Beneath the trees, and in bonfires near the coffee fields. Everything is dry, and so after a wind blows, it catches fire evenly [prende parejo]." "It's not people from here," he says. "How can it be? But who's doing it, we don't know." In the outskirts of La Laguna, near Altamirano, already there are hardly any forests. In La Laguna, a new runway for the armed forces is installed that the peasants fear could be converted into an air base. In the autonomous municipality 17 de Noviembre, numerous recently founded towns ("Nuevos Centros de Poblacion/New Centers of Population'') see themselves affected by the absurd conflagration [quemazon/"fire sale"]. When the smoke vanishes, they will be left bleak plateaus [los paramos/"we stopped them"]. And if the rains, as is feared, are delayed, we stopped them at last [los pa'ramos duraran/"the deserts will endure"]. *translator's note: "los paramos" is ambiguous in last lines as it appears unaccented (we stopped them); "los pa'ramos": the deserts or bleak plateaus. --------- "RE: U.S. Opposes Dump at Ward Valley" --------- Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 14:42:38 -0700 (MST) From: swv1@ctaz.com (Save Ward Valley) Subj: U.S. Opposes Dump at Ward Valley UUCP email U.S. OPPOSES DUMP AT WARD VALLEY By Jack McCarthy The Press-Enterprise Gov. Wilson's long-running effort to secure federal land for a nuclear waste dump in Ward Valley appears doomed after the Clinton administration this week weighed in to oppose the land transfer. The federal government Monday asked a court to dismiss a lawsuit that the California Department of Health Services and the would-be operator of the site filed against the U.S. Department of Interior. Federal officials contend the state's application to acquire the site is improper. Efforts to acquire the dumpsite using money from the intended operator of the dump violate state laws, the federal government said -- a charge the state agency and governor's office deny. The Clinton administration action probably will prove fatal to the project, said Peter Baldridge, a lawyer for the state Department of Health Services. "There is no way Interior is going to go through with (the transfer)," he said. Negotiations over acquisition of federal land in far eastern San Bernardino County had hit roadblocks over concerns about the safety of storing nuclear waste. The site lies 20 miles from the Colorado River, a major source of California water. In addition, Colorado River Indian tribes and anti-nuclear activists joined forces to protest the proposed transfer. Wilson repeatedly has accused Clinton and U.S. Department of Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt of dragging their feet over the land transfer. In January 1997, the California Department of Health Services, at Wilson's behest, sued the U.S. Department of the Interior in U.S. District Court in Washington to force its hand. Babbitt and other Interior officials repeatedly have said they need more time to complete environmental impact studies of Ward Valley. But this is the first time the federal government has said the application process is flawed. "It's not a surprise. It's a last-ditch effort by the federal government to derail a process they realize we are going to win on the merits," said Ron Low, deputy press secretary for Wilson. "They are pulling out every trick in their bag." Pressure from anti-nuclear groups has turned the Clinton administration against the project, Wilson administration officials said. "We think their motives are political," Baldridge said. U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, a Democrat, has been critical of the dump plan. Last month, the state's Democratic political leadership entered the fray, asking Babbitt and Vice President Al Gore to stop work on the proposed transfer. In a letter, State Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa and Assembly Speaker Pro Tem Sheila Kuehl said the Health Services Department acted illegally in 1993 when it facilitated the transfer of $500,000 from proposed dump operator U.S. Ecology to the Department of Interior. In exchange for the payment, the department had promised to license U.S. Ecology to operate the dump once it was in possession of the deed to the land. But when Clinton took office in 1993, Babbitt, the new Interior secretary, sent the money back to U.S. Ecology and announced that the proposed dump site needed more study. But the state lawmakers said in their April 13 letter that only they had the authority to acquire property or to accept a gift. "It's really important for the Legislature to have oversight about the disposal of low-level nuclear waste," Kuehl said Tuesday. "We are supposed to have oversight over financial affairs. There is nothing in the law that says agencies can accept gifts of money." The application's legality eventually might have to be resolved by the state Supreme Court, she said. In the meantime, the court will hear the motion to dismiss the lawsuit June 17. Supporters of the land transfer said it followed state statutes. State law allows use of private funds to finance the dump, Baldridge said. The proposal also had the approval of the Department of Finance. Wilson and other dump proponents say California, North Dakota, South Dakota and Arizona need the facility to dispose of low-level nuclear waste from hospitals and clinics and from nuclear power plants. But environmentalists disagree. They cite a December 1997 report from a University of Nebraska economist that said three nuclear waste dumps already in operation have too much capacity and that another dump is not needed. Published 5/13/1998 Save Ward Valley 107 F St. Needles, CA 92363 ph. 760/326-6267 fax 760/326-6268 http://www.shundahai.org/SWVAction.html http://earthrunner.com/savewardvalley http://www.ctaz.com/~swv1 http://banwaste.envirolink.org http://www.alphacdc.com/ien/wardvly4.html http://www.wildrockies.org/cmcr --------- "RE: LiL'Wat Traditionalist Jailed" --------- Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 18:41:16 -0800 From: SISIS@envirolink.org (S.I.S.I.S.) Subj: LiL'Wat Traditionalist Jailed :-:-:-:S.I.S.I.S. Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty:-:-:-: May 7, 1998 No Copyright; Reproduce Freely LIL'WAT TRADITIONALIST TSEMHU7QW JAILED TSEMHU7QW (aka Harold "Chubb" Pascal), a traditionalist "watchman" of the LiL'Wat nation was jailed today by Provincial Court Judge D.E. Moss in Pemberton, BC. Pascal, a longtime fighter for recognition of LiL'Wat sovereignty, was accused of driving without a valid BC license. Pascal maintained that no license is required, due to BC's lack of jurisdiction over unceded, LiL'Wat territory. Pascal reportedly told the presiding judge Moss of the "fraud" of his BC court presuming to exercise jurisdiction over him. The very charge for which Mr. Pascal was sentenced is currently part of a "Leave to Appeal" application before the Supreme Court of Canada. The court has yet to respond as to whether is will hear the jurisdictional challenges of Mr. Pascal, which are being presented together with those of Temagami traditionalist elder Verna Friday and jailed Ts'peten Defenders Wolverine (William Jones Ignace) and James "OJ" Pitawanaquat. It is believed Pascal was taken to the Vancouver pre-trial center for incarceration. No further information is available at this time. For further information: Lahalus (Loretta Pascal) Lil'Wat Estken: estken@direct.ca Phone/fax: (604) 894-6095 PO Box 208, Mount Currie, LiL'Wat Territory (via BC) VON 2KO More information on the LiL'Wat People's Movement: http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/Lil'Wat/main.html :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: S.I.S.I.S. Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty P.O. Box 8673, Victoria, "B.C." "Canada" V8X 3S2 EMAIL: SISIS@envirolink.org WWW: http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/SISmain.html --------- "RE: Supreme Court of Canada Denies Gustafsen Appeal" --------- Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 3:42 AM EDT From: SISIS@envirolink.org Subj: Supreme Court of Canada Denies Gustafsen Appeal :-:-:-:S.I.S.I.S. Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty:-:-:-: May 14, 1998 Please distribute widely SUPREME COURT OF CANADA DENIES GUSTAFSEN DEFENDANTS LEAVE TO APPEAL Canada's highest court today denied leave to appeal to a number of cases which involved a constitutional question as to whether the Canadian courts have jurisdiction over unceded territory. No reasons were given, but the criteria used are whether the questions raised are "of importance to Canada." Native rights lawyer Dr. Bruce Clark, counsel to the defendants in all the cases concerned, said that the decision clearly establishes that in Canada "the rule of law is a hoax." "We have now thoroughly canvassed the domestic legal system and exhausted all domestic remedies," said Clark. MORE INFORMATION WILL FOLLOW AS SOON AS IT BECOMES AVAILABLE :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: S.I.S.I.S. Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty P.O. Box 8673, Victoria, "B.C." "Canada" V8X 3S2 EMAIL: SISIS@envirolink.org WWW: http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/SISmain.html --------- "RE: BC's Bingogate" --------- Date: Tue, May 12, 1998 2:29 AM EDT From: SISIS@envirolink.org Subj: BC's Bingogate: A Corrupt NDP "We find no honour in the people and governments we've had to deal with." -- Elder Lavina White, Haida Nation 1. Scores of Charges Shatter NDP Myth - The Province 2. Stupich, 3 others charged with cheating charities - Vancouver Sun :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: [S.I.S.I.S. note: The following mainstream news articles may contain biased or distorted information and may be missing pertinent facts and/or context. They are provided for reference only. SCORES OF CHARGES SHATTER NDP MYTH The Province, May 6, 1998, Page A3, by Michael Smyth It's the NDP's ugliest scandal, their recurring nightmare, and yesterday it rose again to rip the governing party. They can spin it all they like. They can say it was 20 years ago and involved a bunch of party has-beens. Don't believe it. This is a devastating event for the NDP, the government and for Glen Clark. This is a party that named itself the voice of the voiceless, the protector of the people. But yesterday's stunning announcement of dozens of criminal charges in the Bingogate charity ripoff shatters the old myths. Fraud. Theft. Forgery. Criminal breach of trust. What a devastating betrayal of the values this party has pushed on us for so long. Some political scandals are easy to understand. An MLA gets caught writing a few phoney letters and he suffers a media onslaught of biblical proportions. But spin your web tight enough that it takes eight forensic investigators three years to untangle it, and what do you get? Re-elected. They got re-elected by slick, clever efforts to bury a systematic con game. Mike Harcourt denied, delayed and defied for so long that it ruined his credibility and he was forced to resign. Then Clark bravely promised some answers. His bold decisive move? Appoint an 82-year-old judge to head an inquiry -- a judge who died two years later. Call it what it was: Brilliant politics. Maybe it was better the attorney-general's ministry dropped this bombshell so late in the afternoon. It spared us a few hours of NDP excuses, apologies and spin-doctoring. We'll have more than enough of that in the days to come. Letters to The Province - mailto:provedpg@pacpress.southam.ca :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: STUPICH, 3 OTHERS CHARGED WITH CHEATING CHARITIES The counts against the former NDP MLA, his daughter, his partner and a former party secretary culminate a two-year police investigation in the longest-running political scandal in provincial history. Vancouver Sun, May 6, 1998, by Jim Beatty, Justine Hunter and Petti Fong VICTORIA -- Four prominent New Democrats and the party's newspaper have been charged with 66 criminal counts including theft, fraud and forgery after allegedly defrauding charities out of more than $1.5 million. The charges against former MLA Dave Stupich, 76, his daughter, his partner and a former party secretary end a two-year police investigation in the latest chapter of the longest running political scandal in B.C. history. Police had also recommended charging former NDP premier Dave Barrett and former cabinet minister Bob Williams, who are both advisers to Premier Glen Clark, over an alleged deal in which Williams would give up his seat to Barrett for a financial reward after Barrett's 1975 defeat. After stepping down, Williams collected $80,000 from a trust fund established with money from the Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society, the NDP fund- raising organization that was convicted of misdirecting bingo proceeds raised for charities. But special prosecutor John Taggart decided there was not enough evidence to proceed with criminal charges against Barrett or Williams. At the centre of the charities case is Stupich, who was charged with 64 counts including theft, forgery and criminal breach of trust. His partner, Elizabeth Marlow, and daughter Marjorie Boggis also face fraud-related charges. Former party secretary Joseph Denofreo and Democrat Publishing Ltd., were each charged with two counts of unlawful management or operation of a lottery. All of the accused are to appear in Nanaimo provincial court on June 30. Police recommended charges against Norbert Rougeau and Bill Duncan, both former directors of the NCHS, but the prosecutor deemed it was not in the public interest to proceed with a prosecution. An exact figure for how much charity money was actually defrauded is difficult to ascertain because apart from the direct theft charges, many of the others relate to fraud, false financial statements and the false elimination of debt. B.C. Liberal leader Gordon Campbell called the charges the latest development in what was a long-running campaign to defraud charities and cover it up. "We've just received a peek under the blanket of the longest running political cover-up in the history of the province," he said. "The people at the highest ranks of the New Democrat party have been charged with systematically . . . being involved in criminal activity." Campbell said the current government can't hide from the scandal by suggesting it was created by former officials who have nothing to do with the current party. In Victoria on Tuesday afternoon -- hours before the charges were officially laid -- all New Democrat MLAs received a written briefing note outlining the charges and the individuals named. Several NDP MLAs confirmed the note but refused to say who wrote it. Assistant deputy attorney-general Ernie Quantz said there was no security breach from the attorney-general's office that could have allowed MLAs to be briefed before police officially laid charged. Quantz said Stupich and the others were informed of the impending charges up to a day before they were officially laid. Once they were informed, secrecy was no issue, Quantz said. The NCHS scandal led to the resignation of Mike Harcourt as premier in 1995 and almost cost the NDP the 1996 election. Jacques Carpentier, the whistleblower from Nanaimo who has spent the last ten years trying to expose the NCHS for ripping off local charities, said he planned to celebrate the announcement of charges. "Tonight I will have a drink," he said in an interview. "It's heartwarming. It makes it all worthwhile, all the struggle and hardship over the years," he said. "I know now that at the end of the day, justice will be done." He said the charges will help restore public confidence in the fund-raising efforts of charities. "Without The Vancouver Sun's participation in this, this probably would not have come out in the open," he added. "[Reporter] Mark Hume should get an award." Summons were served at 4 p.m. to Stupich, Marlow and Boggis; Denofreo was on vacation, RCMP spokesman Sergeant Russ Grabb said. "None of the accused or parties have been arrested or are going to be arrested. They're simply going to receive a summons and asked to appear in court on June 30." Barrett said Tuesday night he's pleased with Taggart's report, which completely exonerates him. He had no comments on the police recommendations to charge himself and three other men. "It was totally unsubstantiated and he relieved the cloud over my head," Barrett told reporters as he entered the Italian Cultural Centre for the condo commission hearings. "When the [former] judge, who is the special prosecutor, says that, then obviously I'm very pleased. What the police did is their business." Taggart said flatly of the recommended charges against Barrett and Williams "no crime was committed here." Taggart wrote: "Mr. Williams did not and could not give or sell his office to Mr. Barrett and Mr. Barrett could not buy it. The office in question could only be given to Mr. Barrett by the electorate as a result of the outcome of a properly constituted byelection." The affair came to light in 1992, when The Vancouver Sun published a series of stories outlining how the non-profit society siphoned off hundreds of thousands of charity dollars to manage its debt crisis. In 1994, an RCMP investigation of NCHS and related entities found 27 alleged breaches of the Criminal Code but a special prosecutor decided to lay charges against only four societies: NCHS, Harewood Social Centre Society, Harewood Community Hall Association and NCHS Charities Society -- all of which have links to the NDP. The four societies entered guilty pleas and were fined $150,000 but the failure to hold any individuals to account eventually led to an inquiry by forensic auditor Ron Parks. The financing of the party's newspaper, the Democrat, emerged in the 1995 Parks report as the key link between the NDP and tainted charity funds. Parks found that Democrat Publications -- an organization controlled and directed by the table officers of the NDP -- benefited in 1983 and '84 from money that had been diverted from charities, money that had been funnelled through a false charity set up by NCHS, money senior party officials tried to secretly pay back. KEY FIGURES IN THE NANAIMO COMMONWEALTH AFFAIR: Dave Stupich - CHARGED: Former provincial cabinet minister, MP, NDP president and fundraiser. Charged with 64 counts, including charges of theft, fraud, forgery, uttering a forged document, criminal breach of trust and various lottery offences. In 1995, after an investigation into the Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society, which Stupich headed, forensic auditor Ron Parks concluded that nearly $2 million had been misdirected from charities in Nanaimo. Joe Denofreo - CHARGED: Former NDP secretary. Charged with two counts of a lottery-related offence. Elizabeth Marlow - CHARGED: Dave Stupich's partner. Charged with 16 counts, including theft and fraud. Marjorie Boggis - CHARGED: Daughter of Dave Stupich. Charged with 16 counts including theft and fraud. Bob Williams - NAMED BUT NOT CHARGED: Former NDP cabinet minister. Worked as a consultant for NCHS. Dave Barrett - NAMED BUT NOT CHARGED: NDP premier of B.C., 1972-75. Currently heading leaky condo inquiry. Bill Duncan - NAMED BUT NOT CHARGED: A director of the Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society and the B.C. Tomorrow society, which ran bingo games in Nanaimo. Norbert Rougeau - NAMED BUT NOT CHARGED: A director of the Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society, which Stupich headed. BLEW THE WHISTLE - Jaques Carpentier: Nanaimo charity fundraiser whose repeated complaints led to an investigation. RESIGNED AS PREMIER - Mike Harcourt: Although he had no direct connection to the scandal, he resigned in 1995. Letters to the Vancouver Sun - mailto:sunletters@pacpress.southam.ca :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: S.I.S.I.S. Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty P.O. Box 8673, Victoria, "B.C." "Canada" V8X 3S2 EMAIL: SISIS@envirolink.org WWW: http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/SISmain.html --------- "RE: Haida Case Targets BC Forest Tenure" --------- Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 00:13:35 -0700 (PDT) From: SISIS@envirolink.org (S.I.S.I.S.) Subj: Haida Case Targets BC Forest Tenure :-:-:-:-:-:-:-Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty-:-:-:-:-:-:-: HAIDA CHALLENGE LOGGING RIGHTS Vancouver Sun, May 9, 1998, Page B8, by Ian Bailey (CP) [S.I.S.I.S. note: The following mainstream news article may contain biased or distorted information and may be missing pertinent facts and/or context. It is provided for reference only.] Vancouver - British Columbia's practice of licensing forestry companies to log trees could soon be on trial, says a First Nations lawyer. Bolstered by a Supreme Court ruling, the Haida are considering legal methods to end MacMillan Bloedel's licence to log on about 190,000 hectares of the Queen Charlotte Islands - home to about half of BC's 4,000 Haida. The Haida will decide whether to proceed with legal action after meetings next week, said lawyer Terry-Lynn Williams-Davidson. The BC government has assumed sole ownership of Crown lands and parcelled out large forest tracts to companies for logging. Canada's top court recently bolstered the Haida's grip on some provincial forests by rejecting an appeal from the BC government and MacBlo. A BC Court of Appeal ruling last November found the Haida's aboriginal rights prevent the province from giving logging companies exclusive rights to cut on Crown land. Next week, Haida leaders will study their legal options, which range from injunctions to asking a judge to review the legality of the licences. But Ron Brown, president of the Haida Nation, spoke Friday as if a decision had already been made. "It would be a definite that we will go to court and finish off [Macmillan Bloedel's] licence." As well, Brown said the Haida will sue for past damages caused by logging. "What's at stake ultimately is the Haida culture," said Williams-Davidson, "the continuing right of Haida people to access our forests to keep our culture alive." She said the exclusive nature of the licensing system is at odds with aboriginal title, creating the prospect for "fundamental change." A spokeswoman for MacMillan Bloedel said Friday the company will take no position on the issue, noting the Haida are entitled to act as they see fit. "It's an issue between the Haida and the BC government," said Virginia Aulin. The BC government maintains the Haida Nation must prove its claim to the land before the government's authority to issue licences is constrained. :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: Letters to the Vancouver Sun - mailto:sunletters@pacpress.southam.ca In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: S.I.S.I.S. Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty P.O. Box 8673, Victoria, "B.C." "Canada" V8X 3S2 EMAIL: SISIS@envirolink.org WWW: http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/SISmain.html --------- "RE: Canada's Rule of Law a Hoax" --------- Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 01:07:30 -0800 From: SISIS@envirolink.org (S.I.S.I.S.) Subj: Canada's Rule of Law a Hoax: Bruce Clark Interview :-:-:-:S.I.S.I.S. Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty:-:-:-: May 15, 1998 No Copyright; Reproduce Freely CANADA DENIES JURISDICTIONAL QUESTION: AN INTERVIEW WITH BRUCE CLARK On Thursday May 15, 1998 the Supreme Court of Canada denied an application for leave to appeal by indigenous traditionalists including the Ts'peten (Gustafsen Lake) Defenders. S.I.S.I.S. interviewed Native rights lawyer Dr. Bruce Clark, counsel for all of the applicants, shortly after the decision was announced. S.I.S.I.S.: Dr. Clark, there's been a development in the Gustafsen Lake matter, specifically a leave to appeal application in the Supreme Court of Canada. Can you tell us about that? Bruce Clark: Yes. The Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal and the decision was announced this morning. S.I.S.I.S.: Were there any reasons given? BC: No, but there never are. There's only one test under the statute - the statute being the Supreme Court Act, Section 40, subsection 1 says "The court shall grant leave if the issue is of importance." So it really isn't necessary for the Court to give reasons. Its refusal to grant leave is automatically a finding that the issue is not of importance. S.I.S.I.S.: For those who are not aware just what the issue is, can you summarize that for us? BC: Yes. The issue that we sought to put before the court by way of a Constitutional Question was whether the non-native courts in Canada have jurisdiction relative to disputes between natives and newcomers over territory which allegedly has never been purchased by the Crown. [The application for Leave to Appeal can be viewed at: ] S.I.S.I.S.: This action, a composite of several cases involving that same legal issue, included that of William Jones Ignace, OJ Pitawanakwat and Shelagh Franklin, defendants in the Gustafsen trial, correct? [Also included were appeals brought by Harold Pascal, LiL'Wat nation, and Verna Friday of Bear Island.] BC: Yes. S.I.S.I.S.: Can you take us back to the summer of 1995, when you were last in the Supreme Court of Canada on this issue? BC: Yes. We attempted in the summer of 1995, in a series of 11 cases from various parts of Canada - BC, Ontario and Alberta - to state the same issue. The Court refused to consider the issue at that time. Following that, I was approached by one of the Houses in the Delgamuukw case, that is, one of the hereditary chiefs, one of several plaintiffs in the case, to state the same issue. So again, I prepared another application, this time in the Delgamuukw case, seeking to have the issue raised there. In the Delgamuukw case, the court stated it would not address the issue because it had not been raised previously in the Delgamuukw case itself. The Court said that this was obviously a constitutional issue, but that nevertheless it was not appropriate to address it in the context of the Delgamuukw case. It would have to wait for some other case. [Transcripts of this September 12, 1995 hearing can be viewed at ] S.I.S.I.S.: On the grounds that this particular [jurisdictional] issue had not been raised in the courts below in the Delgamuukw case. BC: That's right. Now when Chief Justice Antonio Lamer made that comment during the Delgamuukw hearing in the Supreme Court of Canada, I reminded him that the position he was occupying was patent chicanery because the Court, just a month before, had refused leave on the same issue in 11 cases. The grounds of refusal was that the issue was NOT of importance. Here we come a month later in the Delgamuukw case and the Court said the issue is obviously of importance, is a constitutional issue, but won't be addressed in the Delgamuukw case. It will be addressed in some other case, for which purpose the Chief Justice essentially told me to go back to BC and raise the issue again. S.I.S.I.S.: Which you did? BC: Which I did eventually in the context of the Gustafsen Lake trial. Now in the summer of 1995 this chicanery on the part of the Supreme Court of Canada and other courts in BC and the rest of Canada contributed to the Gustafsen Lake event. S.I.S.I.S.: So there was a complete refusal to address the issue? BC: Yes, to address the issue, but when applying to ask the Court to address the issue, I put before the Court the law which resolves the issue. What the law that resolves the issue says is that the [non-native] courts don't have jurisdiction. That's perfectly clear and plain. It's also perfectly clear and plain that the courts' assumption that they do have jurisdiction arguably constitutes complicity in genocide, contrary to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948. So the Court is obviously interested in a personal sense. It is at least arguably engaged in continuing a historical pattern of genocide against the native peoples. S.I.S.I.S.: So the highest court in the land has once again refused to hear the issue, after having previously stated that it was an issue that needed to be heard? BC: That is what the Court said after refusing to hear it in the context of the Delgamuukw case. The court acknowledged that it was a constitutional issue but it just wasn't one that was going to be addressed in that particular case. They sent me back to British Columbia to raise the issue again, which was done in the context of the Gustafsen Lake trial. S.I.S.I.S.: And also before Judge Friesen. BC: Yes, and of course my own trial for contempt of court for allegedly offending the Court by insisting on raising it [jurisdiction], for which I spent 3 months in jail. But again, in the context of that case and the appeal, the issue still was not addressed and neither was the law that resolves the issue addressed. S.I.S.I.S.: Right. BC: So essentially its very simple, the issue is quite straight forward: do the courts have jurisdiction? The law is quite straightforward. Since 1774 the unrepealed constitutional law that resolves the issue says: no they don't have jurisdiction. The third point is its arguable that the courts' assumption of jurisdiction, since the 18th century, has been the modus operandi of genocide in what is now called Canada. S.I.S.I.S.: Yes. BC: In the summer of 1995 the highest court acknowledges that the issue is of constitutional importance. Now, this morning, we find the issue is NOT of importance: "leave to appeal denied." So essentially, the issue is not going to be addressed in Canada. The law is not going to be addressed. The statement with which the Constitution Act 1982 commences, that "Canada is a nation founded upon respect for the rule of law," is obviously a hoax. S.I.S.I.S. This is now the exhaustion of domestic legal remedies. Would that be a fair statement? BC: Yes. S.I.S.I.S.: As for international remedies, you have already canvassed a number of those as well. One was an attempt to have the Imperial Crown convene a constitutionally mandated 3rd party tribunal. [See ] This was also refused. Correct? BC: Their refusal was premised upon instructions from Canada. The Queen refused to act without a request from the Governor-General. The Governor-General wouldn't act without a request from the canadian cabinet. Since the canadian cabinet is up to its elbows in the blood of innocents, it wasn't inclined to giving its consent for a third party adjudicator to address the law. S.I.S.I.S.: You have also been to the International Court of Justice. [See ] They refused to hear the issue on the grounds that one of the parties represented by you on behalf of the Lil'Wat Nation was not a "state". Correct? BC: That's right. They said Lil'Wat was not a "state" for purposes of the statute creating the ICJ. S.I.S.I.S.: Despite the fact that for the purposes of the ICJ, juridical purposes, you could show that Lil'Wat met the ICJ criteria. BC: Well, it was at least arguable, in the sense that the 1704 case that resolves the issue [Mohegans v. Connecticut] constitutionally, at the same time resolved the international law issue. [See ] That international law issue being whether native nations are juristically sovereign or sovereign for the purposes of being able to insist upon independent and impartial third party adjudication in the international arena. That case has been buried since that time. The proposition that I attempted to put before the International Court of Justice was that it might arguably be sufficient to satisfy the test for ICJ jurisdiction. The ICJ never did address the issue. The bureaucracy of the Court essentially stonewalled it and refused to put the issue before the Court. S.I.S.I.S.: So this is a watershed then. You have exhausted the domestic system of legal remedies. You have been to courts below and now the highest court in the land now says the issue is not of public importance and won't address it. Correct? BC: Well, we've exhausted the domestic legal system certainly, but over the past five years or so we've also exhausted the international system such as it is too. S.I.S.I.S.: So this is an important juncture then. Would you agree? BC: Yes. Any pretence that the rule of law is other than a hoax is demonstrably a pretence. S.I.S.I.S.: Meanwhile the case that does seem to be on everyone's lips here is the Supreme Court of Canada's recent Delgamuukw decision. You've had a chance to read the judgment. [which can be viewed online at: ] What is the significance of this case to you? BC: The Supreme Court of Canada makes clear that the Delgamuukw case meant absolutely nothing. It was sent back to trial. The slate is completely wiped clean. Aside from that the SCC made some obiter dicta - some by-the-by comments - which are of no significance for precedent purposes. So the Delgamuukw case, at this stage, is of no significance whatsoever. S.I.S.I.S.: It doesn't define what aboriginal rights are? BC: Of course not. The only ones that would possibly pretend that Delgamuukw was relevant to the issue are the lawyers who argued it and want to puff themselves up and try to pretend they contributed something to legal history to justify their incomes or the Indian Industry. In BC and elsewhere the Native rights/Human rights industry is in the habit of chasing its tail and going around in circles. Anyway, Delgamuukw is nothing. S.I.S.I.S.: And yet there are lots of negotiations and statements being made supposedly on the basis of that case. BC: Yes, well BC is a theatre of the absurd operating totally outside of the rule of law. S.I.S.I.S. : I think I would have to agree with that. I suspect this is now a kind of legal juncture for you personally ? BC: Yes. For 25 years I have been attempting to persuade native peoples that the rule of law was not a hoax. One can't really say or decide that judges are without integrity or corrupt until one has done everything possible to equip those judges with the facts and law which will permit them to do the right thing. We have now done that. In my view there is no doubt whatsoever that the bench and bar in Canada and British Columbia are totally without integrity.The rule of law doesn't begin to function. I suppose, to some extent, I owe those native clients for whom I've been acting an apology for having suggesting that otherwise might be the case. S.I.S.I.S.: Thank you for this. BC: Thank you also. :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: "Kill this Clark and smear the prick and everyone with him." -- Dennis Ryan, RCMP negotiator, RCMP training tapes, introduced as evidence in the Gustafsen Lake trial. Cited in The Province, Tuesday, February 4, 1997 "The genocide of which Clark speaks is real...we are sympathetic moreover, to his assertion the courts are unwilling to hear his arguments." -- from the decision of the Upper Canada Law Society overturning BC's attempts to have Clark disbarred, June 1996 More information on the Gustafsen case: http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/GustLake/support.html http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/gustmain.html WE DEMAND A PUBLIC INQUIRY INTO GUSTAFSEN LAKE AND FREEDOM FOR THE TS'PETEN DEFENDERS. WE DEMAND AN END TO CANADIAN COLONIALIST CRIMES OF FRAUD, USURPATION, ECOCIDE AND GENOCIDE. FREEDOM! :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: S.I.S.I.S. Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty P.O. Box 8673, Victoria, "B.C." "Canada" V8X 3S2 EMAIL: SISIS@envirolink.org WWW: http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/SISmain.html --------- "RE: Plymouth Case" --------- Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 15:39:52 -0400 (EDT) From: United American Indians of New England Subj: 5/17 Action Update re Plymouth case UUCP email THURSDAY, JUNE 11, 10:30 A.M.: ALL OUT TO WAREHAM DISTRICT COURT TO SUPPORT THE PLYMOUTH 25! Greetings, sisters and brothers. Below is a very important update regarding what is happening with the case of the people who were arrested at the National Day of Mourning in Plymouth, Mass. on November 27, 1997. 1. LEGAL AND ACTION UPDATE: We went to the Wareham (Massachusetts) District Court on Friday morning, May 1. It was a beautiful and sunny morning. The area by the courthouse is pretty, with a number of trees. We saw a hawk flying overhead as we pulled into the parking lot at the court. A number of supporters again came to the court to let it be known that we were not alone. We were buoyed by their continuous presence and cheered by the sight of their faces. Many of us embraced. The picture inside the court was not so pretty. We were before an assignment judge, whose task it is to hear pretrial motions and to assign us a trial date. The prosecutor had a motion with him demanding that we be separated into 5 different groups of defendants and have five separate trials. He said he had not had a chance to get a copy of this motion to any of our five lawyers. The judge, however, seemed to be quite familiar with it. In fact, she let it be known that she had already decided that the defendants should be separated from each other. The prosecutor's ostensible reason for attempting to group us into separate trials was that a jury "would face an insurmountable task" and "inevitable confusion" in trying to distinguish among the defendants. In other words, the prosecutor was saying that he thinks juries are stupid. The judge's intransigence was met with disbelief and murmurs of "No!" from the defendants and from our supporters. Our lawyers insisted that she had to give them time to prepare a motion and to argue why we should not be separated. They argued that there was not a reason in the world why we could not have a joint trial. In fact, it made more sense and would cost much less money to try us together. Finally, the judge was forced to back down temporarily, and agreed that motions and oral arguments would be heard on June 11 at 11 a.m. Although our attendance is not compulsory, we WILL be in court that day. In fact, we are asking our supporters to do everything possible to come to Wareham that day and to show that they stand with us. We will not let the court system just go ahead and hand down decisions without anyone there and without a whimper of protest. We will show the judge and anyone else who is there with one voice that we do not want to be separated. The state and the prosecutor know perfectly well that it will put us at a terrible disadvantage if they sever our cases and make us go through several trials. Our legal team could not possibly cover all of those trials. Many of the defendants would be forced to take court-appointed lawyers who are not even remotely interested in Day of Mourning or the merits of our case. Our witnesses could not possibly keep coming to court for so many cases. These witnesses are more than willing to take a day or two off from work or school in order to tell the truth in a court. But no one would be able to take off 5 or 10 or more days to do so. According to our lawyers, we could not even testify for each other at each other's trials because of pending criminal charges. It would of course be harder for our supporters to come to all of these separate trials. This is a continued political attack on the part of the state, which is clearly trying to divide us and try to weaken us. We will not allow our message or our struggle to be diluted. We were arrested together. If the state continues to insist on going forward with this absurd prosecution, then we want to be tried together. We are asking that our supporters in the region come stand with us on Thursday, June 11 at Wareham District Court. At this point, we are planning to meet outside the courthouse at 10:30 a.m. We will send further information at a later date. [Directions to Wareham District Court can be found at our website.] 2. WE STILL NEED LETTERS: We are continuing to ask that supporters gather letters of support from organizations and individuals. Please address them "To Whom It May Concern" and forward them to UAINE so that we can then show them to the "authorities" at a later date. Or you can address them to Michael J. Sullivan, Plymouth County District Attorney, 32 Belmont Street, P.O. Box 1665, Brockton, MA 02403 (but please make sure to send us a copy!). We are VERY happy to announce that the former Attorney General of the United States, Ramsey Clark, recently sent us a letter indicating his support for our case and our struggle! We are also beginning to get letters of support from labor organizations, including Joseph Faherty of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO! We have received letters and petitions not only from all across North America, but also from France, Belgium, England, and other countries. As soon as we get a chance, we will post a listing of organizational and other supporters at our website. The petitions and letters and e-mails and telephone calls are all starting to pay off. Politicians, officials from the Plymouth Chamber of Commerce, and others are now publicly saying they are worried that their tourism industry is suffering from the negative publicity surrounding their assault on us last "thanksgiving." (Gee, guys, maybe you should have thought of that BEFORE you sent the cops to attack us!) More details on this in a later posting. 3. REMEMBER THE PRISONERS! As we enjoy this beautiful spring, please do not forget the prisoners, such as Leonard Peltier and Mumia Abu Jamal and so many others, who do not even have the opportunity to breathe the sweet air and who live walled in a concrete world. Just a few days ago, Leonard was once again denied any kind of parole possibility. Please visit our website at http://idt.net/~uaine19 for links to homepages for Leonard and Mumia so that you can find out more information about their cases and find out what you can do to help. We are calling upon all who read these words to make or renew a vow to fight for freedom for Leonard and all political prisoners. Leonard has said many times, "The courts will not free me. Only the people's struggle will free me." We are not vanishing. We are not conquered. We are as strong as ever. United American Indians of New England P.O. Box 7501 Quincy, MA 02269 Visit our website at: http://idt.net/~uaine19 SUPPORT NATIVE AMERICANS -- BOYCOTT PLYMOUTH! --------- "RE: Re-Awakening of Mexica People" --------- Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 16:43:06 -0500 From: "Frank Blazquez" Subj: Good Work !!! Tiahui from Chicago UUCP email Cualli tonal (good day) Gary, My name (colonized version) is Frank Blazquez. I am 44 years old, live in the Chicago area, and am of Mexica (Aztec) and Chichimeca blood. To the majority of the population I am called either "Hispanic" or "Latino", 2 grossly offending labels to those of us on the Mexicayotl (Red Road). You see our people have been asleep for over 477 years. In June of 1521, our cities in the central valley of Anahuac (Mexico) were destroyed and pillaged by the Spaniards (Cortes and Catholic church). Since that time our people, which are part of the First Nations, have been following mandates set down by our Tlatoani's (leaders). We were to go underground and protect our traditions, languages, stories, ceremonies, etc. until the time of a New Sun was upon us. We are in those times now, with our young people waking up to the wisdom and stories of our ancestors. I am a Mexica Spiritual leader here in our Chicago area and I am working with youth from the urban areas. Our goal right now is to awaken as many of our Mexica people to our true heritage, our true identities and our true paths. We have Mexica elders that have been handed the duties of teaching us "La Mexicanidad", our Native American Identities. Over 80% of Mexican people today are of pure "Indian" or mixed "Indian" blood, without a single trace of Spanish, French or English blood. But the euro-centric schools do not teach us these stories. Instead we are "brainwashed" and "programmed" to believe we are a new race, the Mexican race. Fortunately we have been successful in resisting the colonization and Christianization process by reclaiming our true heritage. We are re-surfacing as Mexica, Purepechas, Huichols, Mayan, Huasteca, Tarahumara, Yaqi, Sonoran, Chichimeca, Totonac, Toltec, Zapotec, Mixtec, etc. My goal, as I approach my golden years, is to spread our teachings to as many youth and adults as possible. We have an extensive mailing list of prisoners as well. We constitute the largest Native American group anywhere on this continent, and by recent US Census reports, our numbers will be approaching almost 35 to 38 % of the total US population within 70 years. Our elders tell us that a unification of all the original First Nations (500 Nations) is necessary to accomplish some of our visions. (A return to taking care of each other and Mother Earth is a good start). Anyway, just wanted to let you know that this "re-awakening" of Mexica people is real and growing. We have been invited to Sundance at Big Mountain by Joseph Chasing Horse. We are making all possible connections with all Nations to ensure a "better" future for our young people. We have been holding sweats here for high school and college kids. We warn them not to romanticize after the ceremonies but to use the ceremonies as a springboard to "spiritual enlightenment" and social awareness. And of course to stop the senseless violence in the urban areas. We have to support all indigenous causes, not just attend ceremonies. I would like to contribute stories to your newsletter in the future!! In the Spirit Of Our Ancestors, Mexica Tiahui, Frank Blazquez home email address: mexicapride@earthlink.net --------- "RE: Done Time?" --------- Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 01:23:08 -0400 From: not@inthe.game (justanoldman) Subj: Done time? Newsgroup: alt.native d'laan'te'... The pus-faced slimeball who's been harassing everyone of worth on this ng has now brought up what he thinks is a derogatory mark about Indian people... having a prison record. So let's talk a bit about this subject... crime & punishment & prison & Indians. Proportionately in North America, more Indian people are in jails & prisons today than any other "ethnic group". Ever wonder why? I don't. Indians (& I mean