I have personally requested permission to "quote" a man who
says that he is affiliated with the Janklow contingent. I have yet to
receive a response to this request. Until we are contacted directly and
given permission to quote a person of consequence in the House of
Janklow we must continue to voice opposition to what has been reported
by people we trust.
As a result of the rapid email response we believe that the House of
cancelled whatever "plans " they had in store for the First
land use rights...of course the House of Janklow denied they ever
" had " anything
planned and attempted to color the email campaign negatively...those who
did respond are to be thanked for their support.
Today the email response form is being removed from this site. The site
active as a testimony to what might have occurred if the House of
had had their way...
Please visit the Dakota Territorial
Chairman's Council site and register your
support via the input form.
As of today, 12.19.96, this issue has generated much activity...the House of Janklow (the South Dakota State House) has attempted to block email and subsequently denied that they intended to act as has been reported by us. The ACLU has addressed this issue and the Dakota Territorial Chairman's Council has issued a statement.
I have personally requested permission to "quote" a man who says that he is affiliated with the Janklow contingent. I have yet to receive a response to this request. Until we are contacted directly and given permission to quote a person of consequence in the House of Janklow we must continue to voice opposition to what has been reported by people we trust.
As a result of the rapid email response we believe that the House of Janklow cancelled whatever "plans " they had in store for the First Nations and land use rights...of course the House of Janklow denied they ever " had " anything planned and attempted to color the email campaign negatively...those who did respond are to be thanked for their support.
Today the email response form is being removed from this site. The site will remain active as a testimony to what might have occurred if the House of Janklow had had their way...
Please visit the Dakota Territorial Chairman's Council site and register your support via the input form.
The AIM Cyber-Support Group has just been advised that on December 3, 1996 there will be a meeting prompted by the Governor of South Dakota to decide the terms of prohibiting any kind of Native ceremonies on state forest land. This would also preclude sundances, sweatlodges and limit the number of native Americans to 40 or under in any gathering.
Our advice is that the meeting is to include Joe Chases Horses and Avrol Looking Horse.
Bear Butte would fall under the proposed restrictions. State forest land is the location of many First Nations ceremonial sites as well as people's homes.
The response to the request for support for the Elders meeting with Representative Volski and the representative from the Rosebud reservation has been absolutely wonderful. We have sent over 250 letters in the past fourteen hours via e-mail and fax.
About two hours ago (12.3.96) I received a phone call from my service provider. I was informed that the state of South Dakota requested that e-mail from my address be stopped or my service suspended that they were being barraged with e-mail from my address. My service provider informed the state of South Dakota that theirs is a public e-mail address and that any member of their service is free to exercise the right to speak to the government. South Dakota informed them that they are placing a block on e-mail messages from my server's location. We are currently working around this block.
I would say that we as ONE voice are having an effect. It is not news that the government is not anxious to hear what the First Nations people have to say. It is a fact, but speak with one strong voice in support of our people WE WILL!!
We gratefully acknowledge the information received from AIM Indiana for the news of this travesty and to Joe Chases Horses for confirmation.
As of 2400, 12.3.96
The governor of South Dakota cut short his afternoon schedule to appear on Televison at six o'clock to announce that the state is forming committees of Native people to address welfare reform issues, preservation of sacred site status and essentially everything the e-mail campaign presented to the governor, in response (IMHO) to the outpouring of e-mails to the governor's office.
People - stand proud we HAVE made a difference today.
Further deatils from the meeting will be sent when we receive them from Joe Chases Horses.
Thank you from the heart for this outpouring of concern for our First Nations people. Please continue to respond...
State of South Dakota Attempts Silencing of Internet Petitioners
In an unprecendented move, the State of South Dakota has blocked the personal Internet E-Mail address of a Native American activist to avoid a flood of petition signatures in opposition of the state's effort to limit Native American access to Sacred sites and prohibit numbers (in excess of 40) of Native Americans from congregating [at those sites].
The petitions were in response to an Internet Alert that indicated a meeting would take place today December 3, in Pierre South Dakota to include both Representative Volski and the Representative from Pine Ridge, as well as Arvol Looking Horse, Joe Chases Horses and other Native Leaders. The indicated intent of the hearing was the review of an earlier court order that overturned, at a state level, President Clinton's 1996 Executive Order regarding Freedom of Religion. States are not bound to adhere to an executive order.
Questions arise with the action of the State blocking E-Mail petitions. Are Internet petitioners availed "equal access" to state designated representatives? Is E-Mail to be considered less credible, or a hoax, even deemed harrassment by officials, though verification of signatorees is available? Are Internet petitioners then afforded less [protection] than those who sign hard-copy petitions? E-Mail is both economically advantageous to many and a much faster means of having public opinion available in a timely fashion. Is the action of South Dakota's not an effort to curtail the constitutional rights of not only constituents, but those most likely to be affected by the legislative and judicial whims, the Native American populace?
If the South Dakota legislature is allowed to restrict access to [sacred] sites such as Bear Butte the impact will far exceed the concerns of only residents of that state. Native American religious practices are not bound by Federal or State defined political boundaries. So then, is it not feasible to not only allow but expect an outcry from more than within the State?
The offenders Internet Service Provider was contacted by South Dakota State officials and asked to curtail the senders activity. When the Service Provider refused to interfere with the personal and private activity of a customer and supported their right to freedom of expression...other means were taken to allay the flood of messages.
In a six o'clock CST newscast the South Dakota governor, Bill Janklow, announced that the state will organize committees to include Native people in an effort to address welfare reform, preservation of sacred site status and other issues of import. Perhaps a topic for inclusion would be the State's right to limit the voice of those on the Internet.
J. Peiffer Willett
"By 1973, with Janklow as Attorney General and Dickie Wilson as tribal chairman on Pine Ridge, violence against Indians escalated, and traditional Indians became the primary tragets of harassment. Whe South Dakota Criminal Justice Commissioner Donald Holdman resigned in 1977, he stated in a letter to Governor Richard Kneip that one reason was the uncontrolled practice of discrimination against Indian people. He said: 'I have become increasingly aware of the fact that Native Indians who hold traditional views and are political activists are singaled out for special attention by the criminal justice system in South Dakota. Members of the American Indian Movement, in particular, are singled out for harassment. Every law enforcement agency in the state, including the highway patrol, BIA police, FBI, DCI (Division of Criminal Investigation), and seemingly all local police authorities apparently agree on one thing, that the American Indian Movement is innately evil, and that they should do everything in their power to suppress the Native peoples who adhere to the goals of that organization.'"
Blood of the Land -
The Government And Corporate War Against First Nations,
pg 67, ISBN 0-86571-241-7
" State Attorney General William Janklow was prosecuting the Custer riot cases. Janklow had previously represented the Rosebud Sioux Tribal Council. Two of his aides, John Fitzgerald and Bill Mathieson, had previously worked with Wounded Knee legal team and had been intimately involved with defense strategy. During the trial Janklow had carried a pistol while traveling through Sioux Falls. He had told legal aide John Gridley III that 'the way to deal with the American Indian Movement is to put a gun to put a bullet in the AIM leaders' head,' in refererence to Dennis Banks. He later confirmed this statement on television when asked by an interviewer if he had made the statement. He answered that, yes, he had; and he added 'I never met anybody with a bullet in their head that bothered anybody.'
"By October 1974, Janklow was running for South Dakota Attorney General against incumbent Kermit Shande. Janklow campaigned primarily as an enforcer of 'law and order' in the face of 'AIM lawlessness,' gaining political points with the conservative electorate stirred and firghtened by the Wounde Knee publicity. Janklow, however, had a few skeltons in his closet which Sande attempted to draw into the open. In 1955, at the age of sixteen, Janklow had been convicted of an assault on a seventeen-year-old girl in Moody County, South Dakota. Although the juvenile was confidential, it was suspected and rumored that the charge had been rape. When Sande publicized the criminal record, Janklow countered by charging him with illegally revealing the juvenile record. He admitted to the media that he had been charged with assault, but in answer to an inquiry concerning the rape allegation he said 'No, it didn;t go that far, but it was preliminary to that type of thing.'
"Then, on October 16, Dennis Banks exposed a second rape charge against Janklow. In 1966 Janklow, working for the Office of Economic Opportunity on the Rosebud reservation, had been accused of rape by fifteen-year-old Jancita Eagle Deer, the Janklow family babysitter. The young girl alleged that Janklow had raped her at gunpoint while giving her a ride home. Medical records at the Rosebud Public Health Service contained evidence of the attack and quoted her as having identified Janklow as her assailant. The rape was reported to the BIA, but with Janklow himself acting as head of the legal services program, no charges were brought against him. The FBI was also notified, but failed to bring charges against Janklow.
"[Rosebud Tribal Court Chief Justice Mario Gonzalez stated] ...the evidence indicates that an obstruction of justice followed the rape. When a complaint was being made to the Bureau of Indian Affairs Special Officer, Janklow was there. The Tribal Court ordered 'a warrant to apprehend and arrest Mr. Janklow...at any time that he may be found on the Rosebud reservation.' The court order was signed two days before the November 2 election. Janklow claimed that the whjole thing was an AIM 'smear campaign' and 'gutter attacks.' Five months later Jancita Eagle Deer was discovered dead on a Nebraska highway near the reservation. The police report stated that the cause of death was 'hit and run,' although some of the wounds on her body were determined to have been caused before she was hit by the car.'"
Blood of the Land -
The Government And Corporate War Against First Nations,
pg 124-126, ISBN 0-86571-241-7
"'I see no reason to doubt that these [rape] charges are true,' Dennis Banks says. 'I knew Janklow as early as '70 or '71, from talks with the Rosebud Tribal Council leader; he told me this Janklow had raped a young Indian girl while working down there for the legal service. Hell, that guy's bad name was floating around even before Custer. We have affidavits from two BIA cops on the Crow Creek Reservation who had picked him up for driving his car around dead drunk and nude. There was also sworn testimony that Janklow rode a motorcycle in a reservation residential area, shooting dogs.'"
In The Spirit of Crazy Horse, pg 110, ISBN 0-670-39702-4
The Elders feel that the result of this e-mail petition is a gift from the Creator to the Sioux people. Unity of the people must be Unity of ALL the people or it is not unity. The people heard a plea from one man, Joe Chasing Horses in SD and the people of the nation, indeed, people from around the world have responded with ONE voice...do not interfere with the freedom granted by the Creator to worship and gather in those places given them BY the Creator. The government has no RIGHT to come between a people and their worship.
You may have noticed that we of the American Indian Movement, Arizona Chapter are vehemently opposed to this proposition. We encourage you to think, very seriously, before you make this decision.
Also consider that you will be breaking a federal law, and Executive Order, and the U.S. Constitution (peaceful assembly), by attempting to enforce this illegal and religiously suppressing act.
Sincerely,In witness thereof; additional members of the Arizona Chapter of AIM:
Andrew R. Mader
American Indian Movement
Tina E. Holder
Marvin Young Dog
"You cite Janklow as saying he is forming committees of native people to address welfare reform issues - SD submitted its temporary welfare reform plan to HHS on October 1, 1996. Even though more than 60% (62.9% as of 1995) of AFDC recipients in SD were Indian people, Janklow and his staff did not even see fit to consult with any tribes before submitting the temporary welfare reform plan. The governor plans to meet with tribal officials re. welfare reform and the state's final plan on December 19 in Pierre - though he has stated that he himself will not be able to attend the meeting. He has not shown any good faith at all to date in including tribal people in planning for welfare reform. Much pressure is needed if SD's plan is going to serve the interests of native people in SD."
Good morning all...
>It is unfortunate, most who are not living close to SD or were involved >in Wounded Knee, etc. do not know this, and can only send their money to >see.
And this from AIMAZ:
>As many people know, Indian Country Today has its problems with AIM. They >began long ago and persist to this day.
A few more comments re South Dakota and the House of Janklow...
Someone here on the List made the comment, paraphrasing I am here, "enough is enough re South Dakota, let's move on." Well, I have no quarrel with that for sure IF, before WE move, we make damn sure that WE know what really has been going on. The House of Janklow is certainly not gonna go away....and neither is this List, nor the First Nations site.
It has been alleged that some here have (Ishgooda and myself) "lost their good names" as a result of the South Dakota petition operation. Of course, that is a matter of opinion...like I've said before, no one can stay on the fence. We all must make declarations as to where we stand in the world. In this respect we live in a "free" country...we all choose who we wish to stand shoulder to shoulder with.
As to the Indian Country Today article, well, I will admit that it has dismayed me...according to it's specifics Ishgooda and myself come out "not lookin too good."
But, the "key" word here is "CONTEXT." The ICT Editor (Giago) states:
"At Indian Country Today we use internet sources as potential leads for stories. We carefully check the sources and authenticate information. We do not consider much of the internet as a factual source. Indian Country Today will no longer visit the web sites of Ishgooda and the First Nations Promotions because of their continued proliferation of gossip, rumor and innuendo in their misguided attempt to support American Indian issues. Their misleading and misinformed sources may harm innocent people and cause others unnecessary anguish."
Now, what do we do with this? My suggestion is to make sure that you "educate" yourself as to Giago and try very hard to create a "context" which will allow a legitimate perspective.
There is much data at the First Nations site...perhaps too much. By this I mean that the "volume" might impede "accessibility." I don't know...
Whatever, there have been two pages at the site for some time that might help "define" a bit the "CONTEXT" I have referred to above. For those who have the time and inclination I'd like to direct you to the following sites. I have excerpted from them both:
"...a code of journalistic ethics"
In the February, 1995 issue of the Circle, there was an article entitled "FBI Buys Ads to Attack Peltier Clemency." To some on the group/list this is old news, to others not so old, I suppose. With so much data coming round the bend re Leonard nowadays one tends to shrug off the reading. However, in this instance, I am glad I took the time.
"Way back when (Nov., '94), when Lisa Hellwig provided hard copy of the FBI ad (which remains available for the asking) I wrote to T. Giago, the publisher of Indian Country Today, to register a complaint. Of course, it was as if I sent the letter off into a void. In part, I said...
"Having just been relayed hard copy of the FBI anti-Peltier ad which recently appeared in Indian Country Today, I am prompted to posit the following. The ad itself is disgusting. It's assertions have been PROVEN to be false! That this piece of trash is forwarded to the world under the signature of organizations representing "over 15,000 active duty and former FBI agents" is, perhaps, the most perfect illustration of current FBI misconduct and their continguing gall re the First Nations/First People."
In The Spirit of Crazy Horse criticized by First Nations Editor
"In the Spirit of Crazy Horse is a one-sided book, according to Tim Giago, founder and publisher of the Lakota Times. "It has a lot of errors in it and outright lies," he said. Although he is glad that the courts upheld author Peter Matthiesen's First Amendment rights - after an eight-year battle - Giago is not rejoicing over the book's new release May 21 .
"Published by Viking Press, In the Spirit of Crazy Horse details U.S.- Sioux relations. It focuses in particular on the militant activities of the American Indian Movement in the 1970s and calls for a new trial of Leonard Peltier, who was convicted of killing two FBI agents in Oglala, S.D., in 1975. The book was pulled from the shelves of stores and libraries after FBI agents and a former governor of South Dakota, William Janklow, sued for libel."
Indian Country Today is consistent in it's approach to the First Nations. I suggest to you all that I am (have been) also...
As regards their assertion that data from The First Nations site is not legitimate, well, I suggest that this may indeed be a "compliment," a "badge of honor," of sorts. Consider the available "data," then form your own opinion.
My regards to you all...
ACLU Addresses Janklow Tactics
Support For Janklow
AIM Support Group Standards
Like a Hurricane...
AIM AZ Home Page
Anna Mae Aquash Archive
Relinquishing A Legacy of Hatred,
Embracing Respect for All Life
AIM Home Page
Wounded Knee Home Page
First Nations Cumulative Site Index
Please provide an opinion as to this site...