13 comments on “MOUNT UP

  1. I have been following your blogs for the last two weeks. And, although, there may be some small knit-gnat points we differ on, in general I find your thoughts refreshing, reasoned, and pretty much spot on. As far as this particular blog, you are correct. Now is the time to press forward, even harder than before. The crimes should be held accountable. The people should be made to answer, even if they continue lying, because they are already known as deceitful. And, the discussions and fall-out from the process can only do a service to the communities, regardless of how painful they might be. I will continue to read your blog, and, thank you, in advance, for your thoughts and time taken to write them.

  2. As someone who works for LPDOC, I can say that everyone I know wants justice for Anna Mae, Joe Stuntz and the approximately 60 other murders that occurred during the reign of terror. Leonard Peltier always supported a fair trial for Graham. Nothing wrong with that – its in the US. Constitution-same Constitution the Federal government trampled and ignored in prosecuting Leonard. Want the truth- try filing suit against the Federal government.Try to get them to release the thousands of documents they are withholding.Get them to give Leonard a new trial , a real trial and a just trial….something he never had.Do you ever here Demain, Woods or their friends demand any of that?

    • Peter Clark……
      For everyone wanting justice at LPDOC for Annie Mae Peltier flip flopped
      enough in his support for Graham wouldn’t you say? Just has he
      has in his many versions of his presence, and his participation
      in the murder of Williams and Coler-not to mention the entire episode
      involving Mr.X.
      Interesting that you phrase it “Leonard always supported a fair trial
      for Graham” and not, Leonard always wanted justice for Annie Mae and pleased
      she has received some measure of that.
      Graham had a fair trial, or do you and LPDOC contest that as would be expected?
      Peltier has received his wish-a fair trial for Graham-why isn’t he
      applauding that? Is it because if he does what has been presented peels
      another layer of veneer off of him and his fabricated persona?
      It is a matter of archival record that Demain was at one point a Peltier
      supporter, as was I, so you’re question is either moot or rhetorical.
      Just so there is no misunderstanding I believe Peltier to not only be guilty,
      exactly where he belongs, an unrepentant liar, a career criminal, and a common
      street level thug, who was incapable of functioning anywhere but within AIM of
      that time period, and with no aversion to threatening a woman at gun point as he
      did Annie Mae.
      He’s been nothing but a pawn for decades-evidently he’s satisfied
      with that and this fantasy of being a heroic role model. Hell, he’s so delusional
      he’s probably come to believe it himself.
      The “justice” LPDOC has advocated for is that anyone but the poster
      boys Peltier and Graham be found guilty for their crimes. If this isn’t
      so why isn’t LPDOC posting about justice delivered to Graham? And what about
      Rios-will LPDOC accept her confession at face value or attempt to spin it
      with yet another conspiracy theory. Will they now call her a fed?
      LPDOC does what it has always done, defend anyone accused, and accuse
      anyone who isn’t. That isn’t the pursuit of justice by any definition I am
      familar with.
      The walls are crumbling, and though I am not a seer, I predict that by the
      middle of next year(2011) at the latest, more indictments will delivered-I
      further predict all those charged will trot out the same stories and LPDOC
      will do what it always do-ignore facts, eye witness testimony, and confessions.
      LPDOC, Peltier, and to a lesser degree, Graham have become industries
      and self perpetuating.
      If you are a true believer I can respect the dedication as I once was also-
      but not the cause.
      In Peltier’s willingness to “interrogate” Annie Mae at gunpoint there is a
      clear indication that had he of thought she was as accused, he was not only
      authorized to shoot her but would have. Evidently LPDOC floats a different
      interpretation, but it doesn’t hold water.
      This is a man who when arrested by the RCMP said he would have blown them
      out of their shoes had he of known they coming for him. This is man who when
      questioned by an elder in the community where he was arrested what of the
      children present- and his telling response was? that it was his life.
      I might add that I just took a look at LPDOC and didn’t see a single mention
      there about Graham or Annie Mae-why is that? And one final question-
      if Peltier is such an advocate for Annie Mae why didn’t he testify, or offer to
      testify in Graham’s trail as the so called main security person? Surely
      in his willingness to interrogate her he could have shed some light on what was
      going on.
      Graham was challenged to take a lie detector test and wouldn’t hear of it-why
      doesn’t Peltier do that? And don’t resort to the cliche they aren’t admissible.
      While that is true, if he passed it would surely add traction to his claims of
      innocence with the public-he knows that, you know that, LPDOC knows that, and I
      know that.
      Hire an independent administrator and have reps from both sides to monitor. LPDOC
      needs donations? Let them start a drive dedicated to that with the money in an escrow
      account and I’ll donate-if not, then Peltier needs to shut the hell up.

  3. I started out by saying “everyone I know wants justice for Anna Mae,…” That would include Leonard Peltier. Sadness surrounds every aspect of the crime against Anna Mae. Leonard had nothing to do with Anna Mae’s death.
    The only person present at the time of (but not witness to)the so called interrogation of Anna Mae by Leonard was Robert Robideau ( the man who confessed to firing the fatal shots at the agents in “self defense to the end “, to being Mr X and who was tried with Dino Butler and found not guilty by reason of self defense.) Robideau stated that when Anna Mae and Leonard came back they were laughing like the friends they were. (For a the direct quote go to Ed Woods site or ask Paul Demain. ) I will not comment on the Graham trial because I wasn’t present and have not read the transcripts. I will say, I am having a hard time getting first hand reports of testimony given at his trial to jibe with reports in newspaper and other” news” media.
    Though I work for LPDOC, my own words are not meant as a statement on LPDOC’s positions.
    Hey at least I can thank you for not censoring your page and deleting my post.

    • PC-what you fail to mention is that Robideaux made these statements post
      trial when he could not be tried again for the same offense-easy in those
      circumstances to attempt to provide an alibi for Peltier wouldn’t you say?
      Hill is also credited with being Mr.X, so which one does LPDOC prefer?
      Which one serves them?

      Since you’ve mentioned that you only speak for yourself and not LDPOC
      then I will ask again why hasn’t Peltier expressed some appreciation of the conviction of Graham and the confession of Rios? As a supporter/ worker
      for them as you say, surely you know the “official” position and are free to announce that as they have the party line on the net these many years, and
      as you have done here with the organizational talking points.

      You asked earlier if I knew how difficult it was to collect information from
      the feds-evidently not as difficult as some would have it with what is, and has
      been obtainable-you also seem a bit surprised that I didn’t delete your comment.

      To that I would ask a similar question- do you know how difficult it is it
      post a non supportive comment in either LPDOC or Free Graham? To ask the hard questions, or disagree? To point out what conflicts with what they
      present? Why do you think that is? Would you, or they, characterize that as
      open discussion or an “shared” pursuit of justice?

      The claim that Peltier was seen laughing and joking with Annie Mae and they
      were the best of friends is the same trite and cliche one Graham attempted
      to use. Is it only me that sees they are reading from the same script?

      The claim was made that Annie Mae was seen with Emma-how Hollywood
      is that-how often has that been attempted in other trials? That the victim was
      actually seen etc etc? Do you believe it to be true? I won’t even ask if Peltier and LPDOC do as it is a given that it is another straw of misdirection for them to grasp at.

      Peltier, LPDOC, Graham. etal have operated on the assumption that if a common enemy is presented/fabricated they can rely on centuries of
      abuse and oppression for it take root with some. Clever-but manipulative
      too, and though it worked for some years, it’s falling apart now.

      I now the process-be a believer, invest yourself in it, and when a doubt
      or conflict arises ignore it, minimize it, find an excuse. And each time any
      of those steps are taken it becomes easier and easier. Difficult to accept
      that as a person you’ve been played, made a fool of, and duped. But in
      the end it is a portion of what defines commitment to truth and justice.

      Peltier can play Santa at Christmas, whine and cry all he wants, defame the
      sacredness of the sundance by saying his life is one, or any of the other
      gibberish he desires-but he, like Graham, Rios,and any other of that AIM era
      who present themselves as champions are what they are-nothing changes that-least of all words and lies.

  4. It’s a funny thing peter, the fact finding style you all have.

    To confront someone in such a way that they will respond with the truth, and then when they know too much, you ask for their real names. I’ve seen it done a few places now, the same style. Supposedly different people, which makes me wonder if you all took the same course, or if you are the same people.

    The truth is the truth peter, no matter what someone’s name is.

    Let me ask you a question. Why would leonard use the defense “I was just following orders”, like so many others (must have a course on denial too), if he had nothing to defend.

    ‘I was just following orders’, to do what, orders from whom, where is the morality?
    It’s sad really how few see the utter transparency of what you all do, and how you are all connected.

    Peltier, the means’, graham, pipkin, the bellecourts, etc. etc. etc.

    The same tactics, the same lies, the same finger pointing, the same feigned innocence. All doing the same things, all acting like enemies of each other, or fair weather friends.

    One big network, acting like a bunch of individual groups, all raking in the money, pretty slick setup.

  5. No one tells me what to say. There is no “party line” we all follow.I am Peter Clark.I only post under my name.LPDOC isn’t some large group of people.I wasn’t using any tactics.I work as a mechanic.I just happen to believe that Leonard’ constitutional rights have been violated.(But I am sure you can explain that away..) That the shootout in June 75 was part of an ongoing battle. That the FBI had no right to go onto the Jumping Bull property–that it was premediated and meant as an instigation. That if Leonard had a trial at least as fair as Dino and Robideau , he too would have been found not guilty/self defense.You believe what you want to believe. Annie Mae deserves justice–so does Joe Stuntz, and the 60 odd murders that took place in that time period.So maybe we can all fight for justice for those victims? Show me where Leonard says “I was just following orders” and what is that in reference to?
    I asked who I communicating with because it strikes me as odd for someone to stand so firmly on beliefs , to spout nonfacts/ hearsay at best, yet be too afraid to reveal your identity.Frankly I find it cowardly.
    Does nesotonohe = rezinate?

  6. ps. join LPDOC on facebook. You can post all you want there.LPDOC does not censor its sites (unless vulgarity is used to excess).We don’t work with Free Graham so don’t lump us together.(speaking of tactics)

  7. Been experiencing what is becoming a monthly event of computer problems or I would
    have responded sooner.
    As id is I have comments set for automatic approval.
    I have a multitude of names I wouldn’t hesitate to call the participants in the Annie

    Mae case, likewise the AIM leadership of that period-other than that I prefer to take the
    higher ground,which I will do with you Peter and not make any attempt to personalize this.

    As I said previously I can appreciate dedication in a person-to a point. As for cowardice,
    that’s an easy word to toss about-especially from a distance, and that is what I consider.

    The real cowardice is raping and murdering a woman-and yet those with involvement have been
    called warriors and even the recipients of honoring ceremonies.

    The real cowardice is those who made the decisions regarding Annie Mae were cowardly enough
    to send others to do their bidding. The real cowardice is Peltier
    and LPDOC supporting Graham
    when they thought it served a purpose and then rescinding it that when it began to backfire on
    them, to then waffle back and forth.

    The real cowardice is to avoid commenting on justice served and doing something more than
    saying “we support Annie Mae”. Truth stands on it’s own, and that is the thing that has bedeviled
    Peltier, LPDOC, and Free Graham-it leaves few options, and the “high ground” that those mentioned
    always take is to attack the source.

    It is a common tactic employed by those on the defensive, a favorite of attorneys, and obviously
    one Peltier, Free Graham, and LPDOC have long adhered to.

    To say LPDOC is open to any and all comments and only deletes those containing profanity is at
    best a very liberal assessment-I personally know too many who have found it be otherwise. I know
    people who routinely attempt to place conflicting opinions only to find that they evaporate into
    the internet netherlands–and you
    should clarify that LPDOC has a site independent of FB where the rules of engagement may be entirely different.
    I have never said at any point to anyone that Peltier was a participant in the murder of Annie
    Mae-what I have said, and what I believe, is that being the “insider”, the “leader”, that is
    now claimed he surely knows more than he has
    said and shouldn’t be cowardly enough in his selfless
    service to the people to avoid speaking it.

    It might also be viewed as cowardice to avoid answering or rebutting points that have been made
    here-like the timing of Robideaux’s statements, the absence of applauding the justice that has been
    dealt to Graham and Rios, the glaring inconsistencies in Peltiers statements and positions over the
    years.

    In lieu of that the response is to ask another question, to subtly impugn Demain, and perhaps most
    predictably to begin the process of applying labels to me. I’m okay with all that, but if that is all
    you have I don’t think it will suffice as what is true remains true, and those who are so inclined are
    capable of verifying it.

    So Peter, think what you will, but ramp up your game-better yet, step back a moment, set aside your
    Peltier prejudice and focus on the inconsistencies and ask your self why? Who and what do they serve?

    Consider if you will my suggestion about a lie detector test and that it can serve only one of two
    ends-adding traction to Peltiers claims or destroying the myth-if it were you after all this time which
    would you chose if you were innocent?

    Will the next tactic be to ask if not only neosotonohe is me, but the others who have responded as well,
    including the women? If anyone is made to look bad in doing so it is you, and I give you credit for
    being more capable, more reasoned.

    Bottom line is this isn’t a site controlled by those who will scurry about “pruning” and deleting
    what doesn’t serve them, or is in opposition to their agenda-that may be construed as bad news for some,
    as the implication is that in my cowardice I will continue to speak those things I will, and others
    in their cowardice will refrain from addressing them in the context presented.

    The overriding difference is I am not a woman to be vilified or intimidated, maybe that will confuse some and force a break with
    tradition, though if history is to be the measure I doubt it would make a difference. One thing I
    will say in closing is that there are women who have posted here-if any negative comments are made
    against them those comments will not appear.

    I own this computer, I sit at, I pay for the service-more importantly I own myself, implicit in that is
    the fundamental right to whatever privacy I would have-none of which is dependent on the interpretation of
    others.I see in the majority use of user names across the net others must feel likewise.

    I don’t avail myself of so called social networks like FB or YT that are little more than data mining
    fields for commercial entities to enrich them selves off of. I have no need to aimlessly drone on about
    the vagaries of my life, what I had for lunch, or whether I am infatuated with Bieber or Gaga.

    I view life to be something more than about me, I don’t believe what I did this day to have
    relevance on a national or global scale. I would rather those I call friend, or brother and sister, to be
    in proximity than ethereal-if it is true that all have an allotment of fifteen minutes of fame I willingly
    cede that commodity to another, to anyone.

    I am a human being and I would live as such. I will dance to the songs and drums of my people, not
    to yours or any others. In doing so I will apologize again for the delay in responding and any false
    sense of accomplishment that may have arisen in thinking I would not.

  8. you wrote ….”It might also be viewed as cowardice to avoid answering or rebutting points that have been made
    here-like the timing of Robideaux’s statements..”

    I am free to spend as much time or as little time as I can answering any of your inquiries and debating each so called fact you present.
    You’d have to ask Robideau–no x in the spelling of his name here in the States. I can’t answer for him.He was not guilty by reason of self-defense. He admitted to shooting the fatal shots . Seems you easily believe Kamook’s testimony, years after the fact. However,you don’t question her timing or receipt of funds from the prosecution.

    You are right-you have every right to your anonymity. Just as many others , you say things on the safety of the internet that at least border defamation.

    Do you know a single attorney who would recommend a polygraph to the most innocent of clients? I don’t know many lawyers, but the ones I do would not give such advice. If you want Leonard’s answer whether he would take a polygraph, you can write to him and ask him yourself. My guess is he would be more likely to answer if you signed that letter with a name other than a “user name”.

    you wrote…”Will the next tactic be to ask if not only neosotonohe is me, but the others who have responded as well,
    including the women?
    It crossed my mind that you were neosotonohe- so I expressed my thought – not as a tactic but as a genuine question. I don’t understand why you ask…”including the women?”-
    And you really lost me here… you wrote “The overriding difference is I am not a woman to be vilified or intimidated, maybe that will confuse some and force a break with
    tradition, though if history is to be the measure I doubt it would make a difference. One thing I
    will say in closing is that there are women who have posted here-if any negative comments are made
    against them those comments will not appear.”

    I just don’t know where that is coming from or if it in any way references me or the subjects at hand.

    “……and you
    should clarify that LPDOC has a site independent of FB where the rules of engagement may be entirely different.”

    What sites? The only Official LPDOC website is http://www.whoisleonardpeltier.info
    I know of no official LPDOC website, other than social networks Facebook or Myspace, that have comment/discussion section.
    I can assure your readers that they are free to friend me on facebook http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001778182644 and post anything they wish to discuss in civil manner. They won’t be block, de-friended and their posts will not be deleted – as was my experience on Mr Demain’s facebook.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s