Tuesday, February 12, 2019

PELTIER: WANTS HIS OWN CELL, AGAIN & SOME LIES

Dear Supporters:

On 2/4/19 the International Leonard Peltier Defense Committee (ILPDC) distributed the following message on behalf of Leonard Peltier. (The ILPDC message is indented and italicized with NPPA comments and emphasis added):

The National Office and Board of Directors, are asking that you e-mail the following Bureau of Prison officials requesting that they re-assign the cellmate of Mr. Leonard Peltier 89637-132 to his own cell for the following reasons:
It is with incredible concern that I learned that Leonard Peltier 89637-132 was assigned a cellmate. This is highly unusual as Leonard has had a single cell for a considerable amount of time, making this sudden assignment suspect

This isn’t the first time Peltier whined about cellmates. Goodness gracious, imagine the horror that on March 24, 2011 at USP Lewisburg “another prisoner was moved into Leonard’s cell.” (Fn. 1)

Practically since day one (and we’ll consider Day One as February 6, 1976 with his arrest by the RCMP), Peltier has marketed himself as an exceptional case, an allegedly privileged character—a wrongfully convicted political prisoner—or so the then developing folklore and myth would have us believe. 

But what happened to Peltier the tough guy?
 

Peltier is a tough guy when he and others are shooting at two agents pinned down in an open field. He’s the tough guy participating in cold-blooded murder, blowing away the faces of two wounded and defenseless human beings. He’s the tough guy when he sticks a gun in a woman’s mouth and threatens her life and he’s the tough guy when he and others steal government property and make a run for it (well maybe not that tough as a fleeing felon thief).*

But apparently he has been pampered considerably over the years with a cell to himself, painting his days away and running a business against prison rules. But that’s another story.

There has been an unfortunate historywith Leonard being negatively impacted by the actions of cellmates. The time he had a cellmate in USP Lewisburg, he received disciplinary action including a transfer to USP Coleman, for contraband Leonard had nothing to do with and he is concerned this could happen again.


Let’s examine this “unfortunate history.”

On 6/27/11 at USP Lewisburg Peltier received two “Shots” (inmate jargon for prison infractions) that put him in the “hole” for six months (solitary confinement, which by Peltier’s own admission he’d spent in excess of five years worth).  One was minor for claiming (for which he had no proof) that he had received a 20-pound Scottish note through the prison mail system and was attempting to send it to someone else. A minor infraction perhaps, but the significant event was that Peltier’s then cellmate was transferred two weeks prior and during a subsequent routine cell inspection a guard received an electrical shock.  Please see the following for an explanation of Corrections Officer Hamilton’s report and details of this incident (Fn. 2).  Peltier was playing dumb that in that tiny cell he didn’t see the exposed wires, and that’s hard to believe, but what’s not hard to believe is that he did at least see or know about the exposed wires but chose not to do the right thing and advise Officer Hamilton. 

This pattern of the BOP against Mr. Peltier is similar to the time that the BOP used another Native prisoner, Standing Deer in a plot to assassinate Mr. Peltier. 

The Standing Deer (true name, Robert Hugh Wilson) claim as the alleged catalyst for Peltier’s escape from Lompoc Penitentiary has as little truth as the decades long lie of Peltier’s only alibi, that Mr. X killed the Agents and drove off in the infamous red pickup. Both assertions are ludicrous.

Rather than repeat here—again—all the fallacies surrounding the Standing Deer nonsense, a previous Editorial Essay devoted considerable details calling out Peltier on this outrageous lie and his lame excuse for the armed Lompoc escape. (FN. 3)

That the ILPDC believes and spreads the Standing Deer drivel is understandable, they are clueless to the facts, blinded by folklore, and besides, these are the great warrior/victim’s claims that they best not ignore. But even the mentor and Peltier scribe, Peter Matthiessen and the deceased Bob Robideau help defuse the babble that Standing Deer was drafted to kill Peltier. (Sorry for using the wrong verb, kill, we’re talking about the “innocent political prisoner” Leonard Peltier, who prefers assassinate! More nonsense.)  

(Without attribution this ILPDC appeal was simply signed, Sincerely.)

No Parole Peltier Association supporters are entitled to do the same, contact the Bureau of Prisons and express their opinion that Peltier is neither entitled to nor deserves any special treatment. It can be pointed out as well that Peltier should be given as much compassion as he showed to Jack Coler and Ron Williams; and that would be none.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods

* 1) Remember, that during Peltier’s escape from Pine Ridge he was in the front passenger seat of a motor home pulled over by Oregon State Troopers. Under the seat was Agent Coler’s revolver in a paper bag that had Peltier’s thumbprint on it.

2) In early 2009 Peltier was transferred from USP Lewisburg to USP Caanan in Waymart, PA. He wasn’t there long before he, to use the phrase from a real tough guy, caught a beating, from two inmates, reportedly gang members who likely weren’t buying into the great warrior, privileged political prisoner tripe or perhaps weren’t impressed that he was a cop killer. Maybe they didn’t care for him because of the reputation that preceded him or maybe they just wanted the bragging rights that they kicked the snot out of the self-proclaimed legend and protector of his people. Don’t know if the gang members were prosecuted or wound up in solitary themselves, but at any rate they should have been. Picking on a then sixty-five year old man, who at least on July 28thof that year was a bloated figure staring at his sneakers in front of the parole board hearing officer, Peltier wouldn’t have put up much of a fight. In stark contrast to this warrior was the infamous Teflon Don, John Gotti who was severely beaten while serving his life sentence at USP Marion. Gotti didn’t whine or complain, he simply told the guards that he “fell.”

Footnotes:
3) Please take a little time to learn about Standing Deer: http://www.noparolepeltier.com/debate.html#standi
            Peltier’s alibi lie of Mr. X: (Mr. X the Interview), (Mr. X the Movie), 
            Mr. X The Lie: http://www.noparolepeltier.com/lie.html

Saturday, February 2, 2019

PELTIER: FEBRUARY 6TH, NATHAN PHILLIPS-STOLEN VALOR & 501(C)3

Dear Supporters:

February 6th marks the 43rdyear of Peltier’s not-so-continuous incarceration since his arrest by the RCMP at Smallboys Camp near Hinton, Canada. Peltier’s incarceration was interrupted by an armed escape from California’s Lompoc Penitentiary during which guards were fired upon. Peltier, captured days later, armed, lost and delirious, received an additional seven consecutive years added to his consecutive life sentences for the brutal execution style slayings of two already wounded and defenseless FBI Agents. (Fn. 1)

Of course, any February 6th announcement will contain the predictable Peltier tripe of, “I’m innocent, Oh poor me who stood up for my people, yada, yada,” and the countless litany of falsehoods and lies that have created the myth and folklore surrounding him since his first Committee started pumping out a false narrative of remaking a brutal convicted murderer into the absurdity of a warrior victim.  However, Peltier or the Committee will never mention The Big Lie that went on for years, that it wasn’t Peltier but the fictitious Mr. X who killed the Agents, a lie that has been repeatedly debunked but conveniently forgotten by his supporters, but not everyone. (Fn. 2)

Unless Peltier offers something completely new or utterly false, as he did on February 6, 2018, we will just ignore it. (Fn. 3)

On January 22ndPeltier offered a bewilderingly incoherent public statement attacking the Covington Catholic High School students in Washington D.C. stating that “There were threats and insults by the young punk wearing the red M.A.G.A. hat,” while Peltier’s AIM buddy and comrade “Nate Phillips was singing a religious song.”

Well, not quite.

Peltier rambles on about the “song” (that sounded more like chanting to drum beats) and demonstrates a lack of understanding of Native American history. He ignores that AIM thugs all but destroyed the village of Wounded Knee in 1972 (actually it was February to May 1973) or the destruction of historical Native artifacts and the horrible treatment of the elderly Mrs. Gildersleeve whose family had been serving and supporting Pine Ridge for decades. (Fn. 4) Nor, the AIM related murder of civil rights activist Perry Ray Robinson, and others suspected of being buried in unmarked graves in the hills beyond the village.  

No one would dispute that incidents like Wounded Knee and Sand Creek are horrible chapters in American history, but Peltier’s accounting and inaccuracy leave a lot to be challenged compared to the actual historical record. Peltier is unable to even get the date of Wounded Knee correct. “Early that next morning on December 25th[isn’t that their Christens (sic) God Jesus Birthday?]…”Actually Leonard, it was December 29, 1890.

Apparently at USP Coleman Peltier did not see the other nearly two hours of videos beyond the short clip that went viral.

What Peltier is incapable of acknowledging is that the students were being subjected to racist taunts from foul-mouthed militant Black Hebrew Israelites who, along with Phillips, were the ones inciting and attempting to elevate the incident into a six-o’clock news confrontation. The students didn’t give the BHI’s or Phillips that opportunity. And they should be commended and respected for that. (Fn. 5)

Phillips, as it eventually surfaced claimed to be a Viet Nam Marine combat veteran only to have that dispelled by admitting in a video that he was “Sectioned 8”out of the military. The prevailing understanding is that a Section 8 is a service member unfit for duty and is released under less than honorable conditions. (Fn. 6) 

The fact remains that Phillips never served outside the continental U.S., was a refrigerator repairman as his military specialty (a duty that is unremarkable but necessary) and left the Marine Corps after fours years, still as a private: Hardly a stunning service.

On the Internet there was more negative information regarding Phillips’ military service but it will not be repeated here because it could not be independently verified.

Phillips, for all his bravado for Native American rights and issues, during some interviews over the D.C. incident, said that the students weren’t telling the truth. Really? Not according to the other now public videos. 

When this writer was discharged from the military in 1968 he received two documents, an Honorable Discharge certificate and a DD-214 (discharge and separation document). Among other items noted on the DD-214 were: 11a, Type of Transfer or Discharge; “Relieved from Active Duty,” 13c; Character of Service; “Honorable,” 23a; Specialty Number and Title; “31542, Special Forces,” and 26a; Non-Pay periods Time Lost Preceding two years; “None.”

Here’s the challenge for Phillips: Produce his DD-214 and Honorable Discharge from the Marine Corps and provide answers to those questions, otherwise, he can carry the burden as one who has engaged in Stolen Valor for claims he cannot support. Stolen Valor dishonors all those who served honorably and especially those who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country in combat. (Fn. 7)

To put a finer point on this issue, we are calling out Nathan Phillips.

On January 21st the ILPDC, under the authority of co-director, Ms. Paulette Dauteuil made a press release covering a few topics: 

To keep pushing for Peltier’s transfer to FCI Oxford, Wisconsin by sending emails, letters, facsimiles and phone calls to:

Email: GRA-DSC/PolicyCorrespondence@bop.gov, Phone: 972-352-4400 
Fax: 972-352-4395; Or write a letter of support and send to: Designation & Sentence Computation Center, Grand Prairie Office Complex, 346 Marine Forces Drive, Grand Prairie, Texas 75051 (Unfortunately, Ms. Dauteuil omitted the state, but it’s Texas, which was added to the above address.)

NPPA supporters are welcome to offer their own opinions as to whether Peltier is deserving of an accommodation transfer. We believe he is not.

Ms. Dauteuil advised about “wonderful” and “exciting” fundraisers in Austin and Portland “to build the legal support fund, for attorney Larry Hildes, who is representing Leonard in his First Amendment case out of Tacoma, Washington. This case will expose the FBI and retired agents in their continued harassment of Leonard (sic) struggle for justice.” (Emphasis added) (Fn. 8)

It is curious how exposing the ILPDC’s and Peltier’s own actions, words and activities that are at odds with the actual documented court records are considered harassment. It’s actually fact-finding, correcting the falsehoods and challenging questionable activities. It’s hardly harassment to offer the truth.

In regard to Peltier suing Washington State officials where in November 2015 Peltier’s paintings were removed from the Labor and Industries, American Indian Heritage Month exhibit, Peltier concedes he has no private claim for money damages under the Washington constitution; he now seeks a (mandatory) injunction requiring L&I to display his paintings. 
A trial has been set for December 23, 2019.

The ILPDC release goes on to state “Please check out our website to donate to Leonard’s Legal fund or shop at our store…”(Emphasis added)

Conspicuously absent from this message was any reference that purchasing merchandise or making donations to Leonard’s legal fund would be “Tax deductible.” 

Wonder why the omission? Could it, by chance, have anything to do with Form 1023, the application for Exempt Organization 501(c)3 status they submitted to the I.R.S. that is at odds with the ILPDC and Peltier public pleas for cash for his legal defense fund? (Fn. 9)

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods

Footnotes:
1) February 6, 1976 and Peltier history:
In re Lompoc:
Paragraph #13)  Lompoc escape: (Note additional footnotes) By early 1979 Peltier was transferred to the U.S Penitentiary in Lompoc, California where he claimed he had learned of a plot by the government to have him assassinated and that he had no choice but plan an escape. One of the inmates was killed during the armed breakout.31 Peltier was captured days later in possession of a semi-automatic rifle that matched spent cartridges at the scene of the escape.32
Peltier received an additional seven-year consecutive sentence.33  
Involvement of actor Max Gail in the Lompoc escape:
2) The false alibi: The lie of Mr. X: http://www.noparolepeltier.com/lie.html
3) “…what participation if any…” http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2018/10/
4) Re Wounded Knee 1973 and Mrs. Gildersleeve; Paragraph 11 and footnote 6:
Susan L. M. Huck, "Renegades, The Second Battle Of Wounded Knee," American Opinion May 1973 (This reference is offered to provide a more timely perspective of the 1973 event) 6 "Hostages were taken and held at gunpoint; residents were robbed at gunpoint. A federal marshal and an F.B.I. man were shot by A.I.M. gunmen. And, for the purpose of "negotiating," one ranking Justice Department official after another has submitted to search and "escort" by hoodlums brandishing their weapons for the cameras." "Mrs. Gildersleeve, the seventy-year-old woman whose family had run the trading post for fifty years, pleading pathetically for help. Mrs. Gildersleeve then became one of A.I.M.'s official hostages!* (*Most hostages were over sixty years old. One was only twelve. They were "freed" when South Dakota Senators McGovern and Abourezk choppered to Wounded Knee and waved magic wands at their fellow radicals of A.I.M.)"
5) Covington Catholic High School students, January 18, 2019, Washington, D.C.
6) Video reference re Phillips’ statements:
"I'm a Vietnam vet, you know," Phillips said. "I served in the Marine Corps from '72 to '76. I got discharged May 5, 1976. I got honorable discharge and one of the boxes in there shows if you were peacetime or... what my box says that I was in theater. I don't talk much about my Vietnam times. I usually say 'I don't recollect. I don't recall,' you know, those years." 
In the same video, at around the 23:45 mark, Phillips states, "I got a Section 8 home because I'm a veteran, wartime veteran like that. Honorable, in theater, so I have Section 8 home."Phillips did serve in the Marine Corps from May 20, 1972 until May 5, 1976, according to a Corps spokeswoman, but did not serve anywhere near Vietnam or any theater of war. He had zero deployments and his only award was a National Defense Service Medal. He briefly had the military occupational specialty of 0351 Anti-tank missile-man before being assigned as an 1161 refrigerator technician. He also was discharged as a private after four years of service. (NPPA note: In the Phillips’ video he talks about his poor finances and never mentions anything about VA benefits.)
7) Stars and Stripes online (last accessed 1/30/19) https://www.stripes.com/news/veterans/what-is-stolen-valor-1.107359 “Stolen Valor” is a term applied to the phenomenon of people falsely claiming military awards or badges they did not earn, service they did not perform, Prisoner of War experiences that never happened, and other tales of military derring-do that exist only in their minds.
8) The Washington State, Peltier paintings civil suit:
9) In re IRS Form 1023:

Wednesday, January 23, 2019

PELTIER: NATHAN PHILLIPS & FAKE NEWS

Dear Supporters:

Peltier had been pushing “Fake News” long before it became catch phrase.

“But suddenly this beautiful and peaceful morning was cut short by the staccato sound of gunfire." (Fn.1) Totally Fake News…

The recent dustup in Washington D.C. at a March for Life rally, coinciding with an Indigenous Peoples March, involving students from Covington Catholic, a parochial high school in northern Kentucky, and the drumming and chanting of Omaha Tribe member and Native American activist Nathan Phillips led to the media circulation of a short video that presented a biased and out-of-context account of the incident. The video and accompanying narratives utterly condemned the students until the Fake News collapsed under its own weight when the whole, true story surfaced. 

What was missing was Phillips injecting himself into the students gathered waiting for a bus and getting into the face of one of the students and then later claiming that the students made reference to building a wall. 

Beyond the short viral clip there were roughly two hours of videos that provided the context of the students’ restrained behavior in response to the foul-mouthed racist taunting of members of Black Hebrew Israelites

The Left went berserk with malicious posts and tweets calling for expulsion and criticism of the school, many of which were deleted without explanation or apology, but even the Diocese of Covington was initially duped and offered a public condemnation of their own students. 

Viewing all the videos, the students should be commended for their restraint and not taking the bait from the racist BHI’s taunts and denigration of a black student or Phillips’ singling out one of the students for no apparent reason.  Were the students being set up to force a confrontation? It would appear so, but they didn’t allow that to happen. (Fn.2)

Phillips gave a number of interviews and was quoted providing a skewed version of Native American history, much like Peltier, blending in folklore and myth:

“This is indigenous land, you’re not supposed to have walls here. We never did for a millennia. We never had a prison; we always took care of our elders, took care of our children, always provided for them, taught them right from wrong. I wish I could see that energy… put that energy to making this country really, really great.”

No, there were no walls but anyone suggesting that this continent was a peaceful place before the Pilgrims landed and the settlers pushed westward needs to revisit that history. There are many examples of Indian on Indian violence and conquests. Some tribes were downright brutal and murderous to their native brethren, enslaving peaceful tribes and totally eliminating others.

Phillips, a long time follower of the Profit of Profits boasted in 1999 that he credited Peltier with his own presence at an earlier Washington D.C. demonstration. (Fn.3)

As for the Black Hebrew Israelitesa group described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a “hate group” comprised of “black supremacists,” Phillips should share with them that as horrible as the Trail of Tears was, many Cherokee brought with them to Oklahoma their own African slaves and that many Native Americans were slave owners. (Fn.4)

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods

Footnotes:
1) Prison Writings, Leonard Peltier, p.123; the first lie; and the Big Lie, “Mr. X did it.”
(Last accessed 1/22/19)
In its magazine, “Intelligence Report,” the Southern Poverty Law Center calls the Black Hebrew Israelites a hate group that is “becoming more militant.”
The Southern Poverty Law Center reports, "Around the country, thousands of men and women have joined black supremacist groups on the extremist fringe of the Hebrew Israelite movement, a black nationalist theology that dates to the 19th century."
Hebrew Israelites believe African-Americans are God's chosen people. The movement goes by several affiliated names. A Baltimore-based organization is affiliated with a central group in New York City that goes by the name of the Israelite Church of God in Jesus Christ. The sect is obsessed with hatred for whites and Jews. Baltimore is one of 29 local branches, according to the Southern Poverty Center.Native Americans and slave ownership: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/how-native-american-slaveholders-complicate-trail-tears-narrative-180968339/(Last accessed 1/22/19)

Sunday, January 13, 2019

PELTIER: PUBLIC CHARITY? PART 2, INUREMENT

Dear Supporters:

This may be the proverbial smoking gun (certainly, no pun intended) in Peltier’s decades long quest to fill his coffers ostensibly for charitable activities but are clearly to pad an alleged need to fund his flagging and arguably non-existent legal defense. 

Peltier has pointed that gun at his own foot and loaded it with a bullet that has  “Inurement” written on it.

Peltier’s alleged charitable activities, and there have been many claims, when brought into the sunlight hardly stand up to scrutiny. (Footnote 1)

Based on years of myth and folklore Peltier has offered himself as the
warrior/victim, as a prophet of sorts for Native rights, but based on his continued cash-centric efforts has become more the prophet of profits.

Peltier has claimed many times that donations to his cause were tax-deductible (often removing, yet returning to the tax deductible mantra; however, there is an explanation for these on-and-off-again claims) but this time adding an extra layer that they are indeed legitimate and under the guise of a “Public Charity” with 501(c)3 status.

The Internal Revenue Service is very clear about the requirements for tax deductible activities of “E.O” or Exempt Organizations and granting 501(c)3 status.

The Application for Recognition of Exemption, I.R.S. Form 1023, clearly states:

“Section 501(c)3 requires that your organizing document state your exempt purpose(s), such as charitable, religious, educational, and/or scientific purposes.”

I.R.S. regulations make it clear that:

Private Benefit and Inurement A public charity is prohibited from allowing more than an insubstantial accrual of private benefit to individuals or organizations. This restriction is to ensure that a tax- exempt organization serves a public interest, not a private one. If a private benefit is more than incidental, it could jeopardize the organization’s tax-exempt status. No part of an organization’s net earnings may inure to the benefit of an insider. An insider is a person who has a personal or private interest in the activities of the organization such as an officer, director or a key employee. This means that an organization is prohibited from allowing its income or assets to accrue to insiders.

And further:

If a public charity provides an economic benefit to any person who is able to exercise substantial influence over its affairs (that exceeds the value of any goods or services provided in consideration), the organization has engaged in an excess benefit transaction.

There is no dispute that Leonard Peltier and his committee have more than a casual or symbiotic relationship. They are one in the same, mirror images with common links and goals. Peltier has made it clear that he is in charge and none of the committee’s public pronouncements and activities exist without his approval. Peltier is the insider. Without Peltier there would be no need for a committee as Peltier unquestionably exercises substantial influence over its affairs. There is an ongoing and lengthy history supporting this conclusion.

To further reveal this assertion in July 2016 the ILPDC publicly posted the following:

“There is only one Committee. The ILPDC is planning/managing the only official freedom campaign for Leonard Peltier (in concert with Leonard Peltier and his attorneys). You may see public or Internet-based fundraising efforts not endorsed or managed by the ILPDC. Beware. These are not approved actions and the fundraising isn’t being done on behalf of the Committee. Only credentialed chapters of the ILPDC and selected partners are authorized to raise funds in Leonard’s name. Therefore, we encourage donors to always ask for a fundraiser’s credentials and/or check with the ILPDC as to the legitimacy of any fundraising effort conducted by an individual or organization other than the ILPDC. Thank You.”(Emphasis added)

Yet, with the legal requirement that a 501(c)3 be established for charitable, religious, educational and/or scientific purposes the committee offers these notable public statements:

“There’s some good news on the Tax front as we received word from the IRS that we’ve received our 501c3 status! So, all of you that have been waiting to send your donations can use them as a tax right off (sic) –now is the time.”

“In addition, the timing couldn’t be better as we are struggling in our fundraising for the office and Leonard’s legal fund.” (8/31/18)

“This move forward will entail us requesting Leonard’s supporters to help make this a reality by contributing to Leonard’s legal fund. And we can let you know that we can send you a tax deduction for your donation as our 501(c)3 has after much struggle become a reality!”  (10/8/18)

It has been hectic here at the National Office, and I want to bring you all up to date on our needs for financial help. We need help on paying Leonard’s legal fees for his transfer and his First Amendment case in Washington State. We are estimating that we will need to raise $5,000 by the end of 2018. For supporters that need a tax deduction we are a 501c3 organization and will happily send you a tax statement for 2018 tax year.  (11/20/18)

Mandated within the I.R.S. Form 1023 application is the “Required Provisions in Your Organizing Document.”

The application referenced that provision as being “Page 1 Article II Paragraph 1.”

However, that section of the ILPDC By-Laws states the following:

Article II. Purposes 
The purposes for which the corporation is organized are: 

To bring together through intersecting learning circles the indigenous knowledge and traditions of the original inhabitants of North America with governing society procedures and practices. On this most heterogeneous of continents, with intertwined histories of its peoples evolving from all parts of the globe, the International Leonard Peltier Defense Committee will work to blend cultures and traditions through mutually respectful identification and acknowledgement of shared universal needs and values to help support and strengthen socially responsible and equitably administered democratic nations

Said organization is organized exclusively for charitable, religious, educational, and scientific purposes, including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations described under Section 501(c)(3) of the internal Revenue Code, corresponding section of any future federal tax code. (Emphasis added)

Sounds notable, even beneficent but also a bit conspicuous that nowhere in the By-Laws or on the Form 1023 does it state they are raising “tax deductible” donations for the legal fund of a convicted double murderer. 

It’s more likely than not that the I.R.S. would not have granted the 501(c)3 if the organizing document or the Form 1023 spelled out the apparent purpose of raising money for Peltier’s legal fund as their highly public pronouncements indicate.

That approved 501(c)3 would hardly serve a public interest but obviously a private one, that of Leonard Peltier, who without qualification has a personal or private interest in the activities of the organization.

* * *

Fortunately, the I.R.S. has a process to report concerns regarding Exempt Organizations.

IRS.gov provides a Tax-Exempt Organization Complaint (Referral) Form 13909 that requests certain information (Fn. 2):

Name of referred organization: International Leonard Peltier Defense Committee, 116 W. Osborne Ave., Tampa, Florida, 33603.

Employer Identification number (EIN): 81-5117989.

Nature of violation: The Form 13909 provides a list of boxes that can be checked where appropriate.

Names of persons involved: Jean Roach (Chairperson), Gerri Timmons (Treasurer), Dan Battaglia, (Secretary), Stephanie Autumn (Director), Yvonne Swan (Director), Paulette Dauteuil (Co-Director)

Dates: The I.R.S. letter 947 approving public charity and 501(c)3 status for the ILPDC was dated August 22, 2018, however the Effective Date of Exemptionwas backdated to December 15, 2017. (Note the dates of the public fund raising notifications listed above.)

Submitter information: On the form the submitter information has a box that can be checked to not disclose the submitter’s identity.

* * *

The above is provided for background and informational purposes.

Supporters may take whatever action they feel appropriate concerning Peltier and the ILPDC’s 501(c)3 and whether it is appropriate for a convicted double murderer to be entitled to such tax exempt status.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods

Footnotes:
(2004-2007 and needs to be updated, however, the 501(c)3 issue is timely)

Tuesday, January 8, 2019

PELTIER: WANTS A TRANSFER

Dear Supporters:

The International Leonard Peltier Defense Committee (ILPDC) is encouraging Peltier supporters to contact the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to support Peltier’s request to be transferred from USP Coleman, Florida to FCI Oxford, Wisconsin.

Peltier’s rationale for this request includes that he is approaching his seventy-fifth birthday, has been incarcerated for forty-four years, that FCI Oxford is 1,300 miles closer to his home and family, is closer to relative Native communities and for health reasons is in closer proximity to the Mayo Clinic and the Federal Medical Clinic in Rochester, MN.

That may all be true but absent from Peltier’s desire to be accommodated by the BOP is the undeniable fact that because of his brutal and murderous actions on June 26, 1975, Jack Coler and Ron Williams never made it out of their late twenties. 

Jack and Ron never made it any closer to their families than the California cemeteries where they are buried.  

Because of Peltier they never had the opportunity to spend productive lives with their loved ones. 

No Parole Peltier Association supporters are also encouraged to contact the BOP to express their own feelings as to whether Peltier should be entitled to any special consideration. Besides, he likely may already be in the elderly unit at USP Coleman receiving greater attention along with other older inmates. 

Background information regarding the Peltier matter can be summarized from the following links or from the NPPA website. (Footnote 1)

Supporters can call, fax, email or write the BOP as listed below. (Fn.2)

Peltier should be shown as much mercy and consideration as he gave Jack Coler and Ron Williams, and that would be none.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods

Footnotes:

2)Leonard Peltier inmate #89637-132
Phone: 972-352-4400 
Fax: 972-352-4395
Address: Bureau of Prisons/Policy Correspondence, Grand Prairie Office Complex, 346 Marine Forces Drive, Grand Prairie, TX, 75051

Tuesday, January 1, 2019

PELTIER: A PUBLIC CHARITY? PART 1

Dear Supporters:

First, best to all for what was hopefully a great holiday season and for a healthy, happy and productive New Year.

Yes, as disturbing as it may sound, it is true that Leonard Peltier and his International Leonard Pletier Defense Committee (ILPDC) has been granted 501(c)3 status making donations—for the first time ever—legitimately tax deductible. 

No, that wasn’t a typo. Peltier’s August 22, 2018 letter from the IRS under Employer Identification Number 81-5117989 is listed as Leonard Pletier. Oops!

In a public release on August 31, 2018 the ILPDC excitedly announced they had some “good news on the tax front” and had received notice from the I.R.S. granting 501(c)3 status.

Upon hearing such great news one has to wonder how a convicted felon, someone serving consecutive life sentences for two brutal murders can become a public charity. (Omitted is a big  “?” at the end of that sentence.)

There should be no misunderstanding that over the years Leonard Peltier has made it abundantly clear that the actions, publications and press releases of the ILPDC (the LPDOC and the previous LPDC) are not taken without his approval. Peltier and previous “committees” have criticized other websites that gave the appearance of speaking or fundraising on his behalf. Leonard Peltier is and owns the actions of the ILPDC.

To clarify that point, in July 2016 the ILPDC published this:

“There is only one Committee. The ILPDC is planning/managing the only official freedom campaign for Leonard Peltier (in concert with Leonard Peltier and his attorneys). You may see public or Internet-based fundraising efforts not endorsed or managed by the ILPDC. Beware. These are not approved actions and the fundraising isn’t being done on behalf of the Committee. Only credentialed chapters of the ILPDC and selected partners are authorized to raise funds in Leonard’s name. Therefore, we encourage donors to always ask for a fundraiser’s credentials and/or check with the ILPDC as to the legitimacy of any fundraising effort conducted by an individual or organization other than the ILPDC.
Thank You.”(Emphasis added)

On October 31st, searching for an answer to the 501(c)3 question, the email below was sent to contact@whoisleonardpeltier.info. The Halloween request was no joke or prank and was well within the bounds of the law and I.R.S. regulations and certainly not libelous to ask a straightforward legitimate and legal question. (Footnote 1) 

That evening a polite response was received from ILPDC Co-Director, Ms. Paulette Dauteuil who advised that she was travelling and would provide the requested application by the end of the following week (November 9th). 

On November 8thanother polite email was received advising that the IRS Form 1023 was copied and would be placed in the mail that afternoon. However, Ms. Dauteuil requested a mailing address. One was provided along with a suggestion that an emailed scanned document would be acceptable.

Nothing arrived and during a November 16thphone call to the ILPDC Ms. Dauteuil, who was polite and courteous, said she had sent the form by certified mail and provided a USPO tracking number. However, a check of the tracking number indicated that the letter was sent but returned as “addressee unknown” and “return to sender.” 

This was a bit odd and after another email request was made to scan and email the document, on November 19tha copy of the ILPDC’s Form 1023, Application for Recognition of Exemption was received.  The application was reviewed and found to be missing pertinent details. A follow-up email was sent requesting additional documentation that is part of the application process but was not included with the form itself. (Fn. 2)

On November 26thMs. Dauteuil politely advised via email that she was working on “getting all the papers together and will get them to you as soon as possible.” Politeness aside for the moment considering that we are on diametrically opposite sides of the Peltier matter, these are now public records and the ILPDC is required by I.R.S. policy and regulation to respond to a records request.  

The “papers” didn’t arrive but instead an email on December 4thfrom Paulette advising that she “…sent a request to our attorney and they will send you the supplemental documents you requested.” 

Curious perhaps, but this isn’t a matter that requires an attorney, only the I.R.S. requirements for 501(c)3 organizations to provide publicly available documents within the required timeframe.

The Florida attorney, David A. Frankel responded cordially and by December 20thall the requested documents were received. 

In the meantime, it would appear that Leonard Peltier, convicted for the brutal murders of two already wounded human beings, and serving consecutive life sentences for those heinous crimes, has in fact received 501(c)3 status from the Internal Revenue Service.

To be continued.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods

Footnotes:
1) From:Ed Woods
Subject: ILPDC 501(c)3 Document Request
Date: October 31, 2018 at 9:16:30 AM EDT
To: clark peter ILPDC

Dear ILPDC & Leonard Peltier:

IRS regulations require disclosure of 501(c)3 documentation as excerpted below from IRS.gov.

Please provide a .pdf copy of the ILPDC’s application (IRS form 1023) for the ILPDC’s 501(c)3 status.

Thank you in advance for providing a publicly available and required document.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods

What does the disclosure law require a tax-exempt organization to do?
An exempt organization must providea copy of covered tax documents to an individual who makes a written or in person request at the organization’s principal office. If the organization regularly maintains any regional or district offices having three or more employees, it must also respond to request submitted to any such office. Covered tax documents include, in general, the organization’s application for tax-exempt statusand its annual returns for a period of three years beginning on the date the return is required to be filed. If the request is made in person, it must generally be honored on the day of the request; if it is written, then the organization generally has 30 days to respond.(November 30, 2018) (A request that is faxed, e-mailed or sent by private courier is considered a written request.) (Emphasis and date added)

The organization may want to charge reasonable copying costs and the actual cost of postage before providing the copies. The law permits this.  But the organization must provide timely notice of the approximate cost and acceptable form of payment within seven days of receipt of the request(November 7, 2018)Acceptable forms of payment must include cash and money order (for an in-person request) and certified check, money order and personal check or credit card, for a written request. (Emphasis and date added)

What does the IRS consider to be a reasonable charge for copying costs, which an exempt organization may charge for copies of tax documents covered by public disclosure requirements?
A tax-exempt organization may charge a reasonable fee for providing copies, which is generally defined as the amount charged by the IRS for providing copies. Under regulations, the IRS may not charge more for copies than the fees listed in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) fee schedule.  Although the FOIA fee schedule directs the IRS to provide the first 100 pages free to non-commercial users, the regulations allow the exempt organization to charge a fee for all copies. The FOIA schedule currently provides a charge of $.20 per page. (Emphasis added)
An organization may require payment before it provides copies, but must advise requesters of the total cost of the copies requested if adequate payment is not included with the request. The organization may also charge the actual postage costsit incurred to mail copies to the requester. (Emphasis added)

2) Email, November 22, 2018:

Paulette:  

I will not wish you a Happy Thanksgiving because I understand and appreciate that this is not a day for celebration by Native Americans. 

Thank you for the 1023 Application Form, however there are more documents and information associated with the 501(c)3 application that are part of the public records and request process for tax exempt organizations. Several sections that are marked “yes” require further details and explanations and are an integral element of the 501(c)3 application and are required for public inspection. 

Please provide copies (scanned and emailed would be acceptable and preferred) for the following application references:

1) Part II, 5: A copy of the Florida filed corporate by-laws.

2) Part III, 1: Location and purpose clause; "Article II Purpose." (Assuming this may be satisfied with the copy of the By-Laws, above.)

3) Part IV: Narrative Description of Your Activities: From form 1023; “…Using an attachment….it will be open for public inspection. Therefore, your narrative description of activities should be thorough and accurate.”      Please provide this narrative as provided with the 1023 application.

4) Part V, 2b: This question was answered “Yes.” According to the Form, “If ‘Yes’ identify the individuals and describe the business relationship with each of your officers, directors, or trustees.” Please provide the answer to this question as provided with the 1023 Form.

5) Part VI, 1a: This question was answered “yes.” Please provide details related to “past, present, and planned activities,” and, “describe each program that provides goods, services, or funds to individuals” as provided with the 1023 application. 

6) Part VIII, 10: The answer to this question was “yes.” “If ‘Yes', explain. Describe who owns or will own any copyrights, patents, or trademarks, whether fees are or will be charged, how the fees are determined, and how any items are or will be produced, distributed, and marketed.” 
Please provide the answer to this question as provided with the 1023 Form.

7) Part VIII, 11: The answer to this question was “yes” and the form stated, “If ‘Yes,’ describe each type of contribution, any conditions imposed by the donor on the contribution, and any agreements with the donor regarding the contribution.” Please provide the answer to this question as provided with the 1023 Form. 

8) Part VIII, 22: The answer to this question was “yes,” and “If 'Yes,' complete Schedule H.” Please provide a copy of the Schedule H details provided with this 1023 application form.

9) Schedule G, 2a: The answer to this question was “yes.” Schedule G states, “If ‘yes’ explain the relationship with the other organization that resulted in your creation.” Please provide the answer to this question as provided on the 1023 Form. 

10) Paulette, you signed the application as the Co-Executive Directoryet are not listed in Part V of Officers, Directors or Trustees. Was this missed while scanning the document?

Thank you.

Regards,
“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed