Saturday, October 23, 2010

"I was railroaded, victimized," "I'm innocent"

In Leonard’s September 6th statement it’s almost as if he’s calling his loyal supporters idiots. He must think that because even the most ardent follower…those who won’t be sidetracked or confused by the facts…can’t read. However, if they read just 10% of the legal history of this case they’d start asking Peltier some serious questions. But that’s not likely to happen and just how Peltier wants it…follow me he says, I was railroaded, I’m innocent, I was victimized. Drinking the full-dose Cool Aid, laced with all the mythology and folklore, is exactly what he wants his supporters to do…but don’t ask too many questions…and definitely don’t seek those pesky details. Just follow Peltier blindly into the forest.

“Staggering Constitutional violations?” (Peltier’s October 16, 2010 meeting with his “team of lawyers,” his “dream team” must have been quite a gathering.) Hardly. If there was one, let alone many, he still wouldn’t be sitting in Lewisburg. To think that at this stage there would be a legitimate basis for any procedural legal action is inane. But then that goes along with the grand Peltier plot that the entire government and the judiciary, right up to the U.S. Supreme court conspired, as he put’s it, to convict the last Indian standing for the brutal deaths of two FBI agents. Gee then, it must have been Mr. X.
And everyone knows Leonard lied about that little matter. (

“But I was in Seattle that day.”

No, Leonard didn’t really say that, but for argument sake (again…) let’s repeat the twenty-seven (27) most important words—one single sentence—from the thousands of pages relating to this case: “I seen Joe when he pulled it out of the trunk and I looked at him when he put it on, and he gave me a smile.” (ITOSH p.552; See also July 12, 2010 blog for a further explanation and

If those twenty-seven words were changed to: “I thought those agents were after me. I panicked and started shooting and other’s helped. But I had to kill them because dead men make poor witnesses,” their meaning and significance would not be any different.

“As a young man, all I wanted to do was make a positive difference in People’s lives.” He made a difference for sure, but Leonard came very late (about two years earlier) to the “movement” and any pretense of support for his “people.” Prior to that he was just getting by, and “When I was younger,” Leonard says, “I thought it was a lot of fun running around like that, shaking off all those wives. Now I’m older, I realize I hurt a lot of those women, and I feel very bad about it, I really do. I think about them all the time now, especially the ones that had my kids.” (ITSOCH p.533) Then he turned to murder and hijacked an otherwise proud native tradition.

If Leonard believes all this rhetoric…and he does…and because he’s no fool and is milking the only thing that has kept any light shinning on him (although the bright light has faded to a dim bulb) he needs to stand up and become the warrior he’s claimed to be…to use a colloquialism, he needs to find a backbone.

Stand up and show your remaining supporters where the money has gone (post yours and the LPDOC/LPDC’s tax returns), and if you’re not terrified about showing the whole story, link to the No Parole Peltier Association (NPPA) website.

If you won’t do that, then you remain the same coward you and the others were at Jumping Bull.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods

Sunday, October 3, 2010

A "Dog-Dare" for Leonard Peltier: Where's the link?

A “dog dare” for Leonard Peltier

For the moment, to add just a slight measure of humor to an otherwise deadly serious situation, and to borrow an old Navy expression, this will be another shot across the bow for Leonard and the ever-changing stalwarts of the LPDOC. (Can we remember the LPDC and it’s multiple reincarnations and self-destruction? Sure, see Editorial Essays #18, #19, #20, #31, #34, #38, and #41. #41 relates to Peltier’s criticism of Delaney Bruce to “Cease and Desist,” yet, she is back again…)

Trying not to sound like a broken record (but that’s redundant in the Peltier argument because all they do is repeat the same false information…but that’s another story), this challenge has been launched to Peltier and his inner circle in the past, and ignored, but this time it’s very serious and directed not just at the LPDOC but any of the remaining Peltier supporters out in the field.

You’ve all heard and seen it before:

Since its inception on April 30, 2000 (that’s ten years and six months ago if anyone’s counting), there has been a link on the No Parole Peltier Association home page to Peltier’s website.

The message, repeated here for clarity, reads:

*For the concerned reader and researcher, the LPDOC can be found at The FBI’s review of the case can be found at (It’s noted that Darelle (Dino) Butler has not been listed as a director/advisor of the LPDC or LPDOC).

The (*) asterisk was from the very first sentence on the home page directing readers to the link to the then LPDC, and now the LPDOC.

The link has been updated a number of times as it changed over the years, which shouldn’t be too surprising. The NPPA link, however, has remained, along with its message, consistent.

So there it is, from the very beginning asking anyone interested in the Peltier matter to go and see what Peltier and his network had to say and for them to come to their own informed decision about which side was presenting the accurate and factual history.

On this side of the fence there’s nothing to hide; matter of fact, from the inception of the NPPA all the relevant and critical court decisions were posted so people could read what happened for themselves, to review the real legal history of this case and not the out-of-context excerpts spun by Leonard and others.

So now we need to ask Leonard one very simple and straight forward question.

Let’s also ask Vivian Mendoza, Pamela Bravo, Jean Ann Day, Betty Ann Solano, Delaney Bruce, Peter and Barbara Clarke, John Gallagher, Arthur Miller, Lakoda and Kassandra Robideau (Regional organizers of the “International-Pacific Region which includes Australia, New Zealand, Pacific Islands [including Hawaii]) (Really, that’s quite impressive!), and all the TBA’s (the yet to be named, To Be Announced, phantom organizers):

What do you have to hide?

If, as you claim, Peltier is innocent, was railroaded because somebody had to pay for killing those two agents and there was a political agenda to dismantle the American Indian Movement, etc., etc., etc., then why hide half the story?

To make the point crystal clear let’s borrow a scene from the iconic modern American film classic, A Christmas Story, set in circa 1940 Cleveland, Ohio where there’s a schoolyard standoff between Schwartz, who’s daring Flick to stick his tongue to a metal pole on a cold winter’s day, while the other kids watch.

Lenny: Are you kidding, put a link on my website to the NPPA? That’s dumb!
Eddie: That’s cause you know you’ll lose whatever supporters you have left.
Lenny: You’re full of it!
Eddie: Oh yeah?
Lenny: Yeah!
Eddie: Well I double-DOG-dare ya!
(Narrator: “NOW it was serious. A double-dog dare. What else was there but a “triple dare you”? And then, the coup de grace of all dares, the sinister triple-dog-dare.”)
Eddie: I TRIPLE–dog-dare ya!
(Narrator: “Eddie created a slight breach of etiquette by skipping the triple dare and going right for the throat!”)

Well, Leonard, there it is, just as plain and simple as can be. If, and that’s a mighty big “IF” you want to salvage your dwindling support, then show some backbone and don’t be afraid to link to the NPPA. Really, what do you have to lose? If your message is the right one then you’re way ahead and will gain more supporters, otherwise you’re still the same coward you were at Jumping Bull.

So, I triple-dog-dare-you.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”