Dear Supporters:
Breaking camp: Once
again the LPDOC is facing internal strife and the latest leader to abandon ship,
Dorothy Ninham, and Peltier himself provide some telling details. In each statement it is important to
focus on those key words and connect the dots to understand what’s really
happening and why every two or three years there’s a turnover in the Peltier
camp. For a brief review of how ugly it became at times, please see (Footnote
#1).
Ninham states “From a business standpoint, it is good policy
to replace managers every three years just to keep ideas fresh and so it is
that David Hill will guide the new freedom campaign.” This in effect removes the
money-laundering scheme perpetuated by Wind Chases the Sun, Inc, in DePere,
Wisconsin. We’ll have to see if David Hill, who has a trunk-full of his own AIM
history and baggage tries to wrap it in some other way that the IRS will
accept. Remembering, after all, Peltier is not a charity case. Never was, never
will be.
So there it is; Peltier, Inc.
It’s a business packaged with folklore and falsehoods that
the unsuspecting buy into (no pun intended) without shining some direct light
on the facts. Has anyone ever seen where all those allegedly tax deductible
donations have gone? No, they haven’t and never will. It remains Peltier’s dirty
little secret and no amount of dares have forced him to come clean to his
dwindling supporters (Fn #2).
Ninham and those before her have had enough of the Coleman
inmates’ bullying do-it-my-way-or-else
fractured ego. Peltier was an AIM thug before he became an AIM assassin and
nothing has changed. She gracefully sugarcoats it with, “This is Leonard’s wish
and we respect his right to choose the people who will be surrounding
him.” Which is the polite way of
saying she’s had enough of Peltier.
Peltier’s explanation revealed more with a predictable
understatement “…those of you who
are familiar with the organization, there have been changes every two or three
years…,” but as he segues back and forth with coAIMintelpro style
(Fn #3) diversions, trying to convince that “This isn’t all
about me,” clarifies that it really is; “We don’t have enough money to always
fund the most needed lawyers (…who serve pro bono by the way…) and legal
workers or secretaries or web managers or whatever.” The word, “whatever,”
should raise some eyebrows because that slip of the tongue, (which has happened
before and is actual proof—unlike many LPDOC cyberspace launched missives—really did come from
Peltier himself), pulls back the curtain just a bit and hints that those
“tax-deductible” dollars have some other hidden and probably illicit purpose.
But Peltier finally gets to the point of this latest dustup
in Peltierland. “So I would like to sincerely encourage you to try and mend
your differences…(followed by yet another diversion). Ninham implied nothing of
the sort but now Peltier is admitting that there was trouble in paradise. Why
else would he ask for some reconciliation amongst his loyal network leaders?
But then Peltier does come down to the a final admission,
“…but the future of my involvement is very important to me and when you
get to be 69 years old, one day could be a lifetime.” And, then more diversions
to keep the eyes of those watching off the proverbial ball. It’s all about him,
pure and simple. The pretense of care for his people is part of the scam, an
element of the pretense that all he really needs is for you to write a check.
Nelson Mandela:
Peltier rambled about the passing of Nelson Mandela, but in a few recent news
clips of interviews a couple of key quotes are worth noting; Mandela said he
“reflected on (his) mistakes,” and that he engaged in “authentic acts of
humility.” There is one difference
with absolute certainty, Peltier is no Mandela and any effort to equate the two
is folly.
Proof of lies:
Anyone interested in the Peltier experience need not travel far to run headlong
into a hedge grove of lies. One can start with the link on the NPPA’s home page
that takes them to Peltier’s website, where, among other things are two
flagrant examples of Peltier’s penchant to lie and the LPDOC’s inability to
recognize that they are helping make the case for Peltier’s guilt even stronger.
Mr. X, anyone? This two decade long lie and one of Peltier’s
early and many alibis has been proven to be false in 1995 by one who was at Jumping Bull that fateful
day, Dino Butler. And, along with other additional proof, most recently by
Peltier’s own attorney just this year. (Fn #4)
Yet here we have the film “Incident at Oglala” played,
annoyingly without prompting, and the dated and slanted 1991 Steve Kroft, 60
Minutes interview. In both a masked and graveled voiced Mr. X claims credit for
driving the red pickup and first engaging and then killing the agents. This
isn’t new news to anyone, either for or against Peltier and common knowledge
that Peltierites desperately try to bury.
In “Incident” Robideau goes into great detail about what he
saw and Peltier himself follows with, “This story is true.” Well, it wasn’t.
With Kroft, Peltier admits “Yes, I fired at them,” but in
his autobiography, Prison Writings
(1999) claims “I fired off a few shots above their heads, not trying to hit
anything or anyone (p.125)” Ooops…must have forgotten what he told Kroft while
he also failed to mention anything about Mr. X or the infamous red pickup in
the book. Wonder why that happened?
The reason these two pieces are on the Peltier homepage is obvious,
self-perpetuating propaganda because there is criticism of the FBI and
Peltier’s conviction. They both, however, in an awkward sort of way, portray
and augment the myth and folklore Peltier has succeeded in wrapping himself in
as he tries to transform the murderer into a warrior and the Native into a perpetual victim. He plays both cards from the bottom of several marked decks.
Actually, they lay bare the blatant hypocrisy of Peltier’s
fabrications (i.e., deliberate lies), but only those looking closely can see
the trees and the forest.
There it is, in living color on Peltier’s home page, one of
the key people in the entire legal process of his last nearly four decades behind
bars, as Kroft asks Federal, Court of Appeals Judge, Heaney, the sixty-four dollar
question. (It is my personal
opinion that this live interview was not scripted and based on the bias of the
entire 60 Minutes program—taken wholly from the then Peltier playbook—that Kroft
was taken aback by Judge Heaney’s response, like the lawyer questioning a
witness who should never ask a question unless
he already knows the answer.)
Kroft: “Do you believe he got a fair trial?”
Judge Heaney: “I believe he got a fair trial.”
Judge Heaney: “I believe he got a fair trial.”
Case closed.
“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods
Footnotes:
