Dear Supporters:
Apart from being a remorseless convicted murderer, over
the years Peltier has said and done many pretty outrageous things. But aside
from some of his incredibly self-incriminating public admissions and statements,
fabrications and outright lies, releasing or allowing his attorneys (Garbus,
Dunne and Nadler) to release his Clemency Petition was not a smart move. If
they thought it would be of any benefit, they are sadly mistaken. The Petition
is replete with falsehoods that collapse under even casual scrutiny. Like this
old canard about “paramilitary operations.”
On page 19 of the Petition and in footnote 15, Peltier
states:
“On April 24, 1975
the FBI began preparing to conduct “paramilitary operations” on the Pine Ridge
Reservation particularly against the AIM.” The footnote stated: See April 24, 1975 Memorandum, Gebhardt to
O’Connell. “the use of Special Agents of the FBI in Paramilitary Law
enforcement Operation in Indian Country”
This was the allegedly infamous “Sanctioned Memo”
that was addressed in detail by the NPPA in 2006 in an Editorial Essay
debunking claims by another AIM thug and lowlife, the now deceased Bob
Robideau.[i] Peltier also made this
ridiculous claim in his ninth-grade reading level autobiography, Prison
Writings.[ii]
There’s no surprise that Peltier and previous attorneys,
and Robideau, would only see want they want to see in the memo, but it is
surprising that Messrs. Garbus didn’t take the time to vet Peltier’s bogus
claims about the meaning and significance of this very straight-forward memorandum.
So much for thorough research and pitifully weak advocacy.[iii]
It would be too kind to
say that Robideau at the time, was just honestly mistaken regarding his
characterization of the purpose of this memorandum because he had alleged this
before, as had the LPDC and Peltier. This has become one of the cornerstones of
Peltier folklore. Peltier, and now his misguided attorneys, deliberately
misrepresent the purpose and meaning of this memo in their pathetic cries for
clemency. However, any reasonable person (current legal scream team
notwithstanding) who takes the time to read and comprehend the memo would
easily understand that Peltier is wrong (kind assumption) or deliberately lying
(a reality) about this fatally flawed
claim.
The purpose of the April 24, 1975 internal FBI
memo,[iv]
"The use of Special Agents of the
FBI in a paramilitary law enforcement operation in the Indian Country," is
stated in the very first sentence;
“…to brief the Attorney General…on the role of the FBI in the event of a major confrontation in Indian Country…"
The memo clearly states the problems the FBI encountered while coordinating the American Indian Movement (AIM) siege of Wounded Knee in February 1973 by still attempting to establish a clearly defined chain of command structure and decision making process. The memo shows that no less than a dozen agencies: Department of Justice attorneys, United States Attorney, White House officials, Department of the Interior, FBI, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Marshal's Service, Public Information Officers, Community Relations Service, Department of Defense, U.S. Army, Tribal Police, in addition to church and social groups and the media, all contributed to a situation that FBI officials regarded as detrimental to resolving what was first and foremost a hostage situation.
Conflicting directives emanated from a lack of continuity, divided authority, and an indefinite command structure that fostered confusion during the seventy-one day siege. The FBI wanted, but did not secure: the operational direction and leadership role it desired, to remove any political influence and considerations from what was essentially a tactical law-enforcement operation.
This position paper was reviewed by a number of FBI officials as evident by the eight (8) sets of initials at the end of the memo. In addition, a handwritten notation at the bottom of the cover page, and a date of August 11, 1975, clearly shows that there were still questions about control and accountability even after the murders of Special Agents Jack Coler and Ron Williams in June, 1975.
Can Peltier and The Three…Stoo…attorneys, grasp that distinction? Evidentially not. Or more likely, they just ignorantly evade it in the hopes that everyone one else does also. (The USDOJ Pardon Attorney, the Attorney General and the President certainly won’t.)
Without restating the entire memo (which concerned readers are
encouraged to read for themselves), some of the more relevant points follow:
Problems
confronting the FBI:
-The FBI was not equipped logistically to
operate in a paramilitary situation in open terrain which ultimately ended in a
71-day siege.
-In essence…complete confusion existed as
there were a number of DOJ (Department of Justice) representatives on the
scene, each issuing conflicting orders.
-There was no coordination between the agencies
other than that provided by the FBI, nor was there any advanced planning done.
-SAC Held (FBI Special Agent in Charge) at
the time advised FBIHQ to have any success at Wounded Knee it would be
necessary to withdraw the "political types" and make it an FBI
operation under FBI direction and leadership.
-…there was a constant vacillation of
instructions and policy which was devastating.
-It should be clearly stated that the FBI
does not desire to become involved in any political situations and definitely
not participate in any discussion where it is obviously political in nature.
And,
-All SAC’s recommended should we in the
future become involved in another situation similar to Wounded Knee where
Special Agent personnel are deployed that the entire operation be under the
direction of FBI officials and when law enforcement personnel from other
agencies are involved it should be clearly understood the FBI is in the
decision making role.
-(The Attorney General should)…fully
understand if such an incident occurs in the future or an
incident similar to Wounded Knee and the FBI is involved, the FBI will insist
upon taking charge from the outset…
* * *
If Peltier’s present clemency attorneys took the time to
thoroughly read and understand this memo they would not be able to claim it was
somehow a mandate for the government to sanction anything in Indian Country.
Quite the contrary, this memo means exactly what it states; the folklore
fabrications notwithstanding.
So who is Peltier and his lawyers trying to fool anyway? Peltier
supporters? Perhaps, and this is easily done. People who took the effort to
properly read and understand what is a very straight-forward government position
paper? Not hardly. Garbus, Dunne, Nadler, Et. Al, thank you again for making Peltier’s clemency application public. It was really a dumb move.
We’ll end with a familiar refrain:
Dear President
Obama:
It’s unlikely, but if Leonard Peltier’s clemency application should ever reach your desk, please weigh it in regard to just two of Peltier’s many public statements concerning the unprovoked attack and brutal murders of two federal agents, “And really, if necessary, I’d do it all over again because it was the right thing to do” (2010), and, “I don’t regret any of this for a minute” (2014). Peltier remains a remorseless and unrepentant murderer.
“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods
[i]
http://www.noparolepeltier.com/debate.html#critic
The reason why Robideau abandoned Peltier can be found on the Rezinate Blog.
[ii]
Leonard Peltier, Prison Writings (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999) 129
[iii]
There may be positions open at the law firm of Boring and Leach, 118 NW. 4th
St., Guymon, OK 73942
[iv]
http://www.noparolepeltier.com/letters.html It should be noted that the
hand-written underlining in this copy of the memo (provided for reference and
educational purposes under the "fair use doctrine" from the original
LPDC website), were made previously by someone in the LPDC. Concerned
researchers are invited to compare those identified sections to the ones
enumerated in the editorial essay, and then determine of the two which is the
honest evaluation of the purpose and intent of this FBI memorandum.
