69 comments on “A RESPONSE FOR ISOBEL

  1. I hate to disappoint you about my slowly admitting but Russell knew I said he wasn’t a saint years ago, he didn’t claim to be one. And if defending him it is often the case that people assume you are putting someone on a pedestal and basing it on mythology not the person.

    It is good to see however that you drawing attention to the points I have made about the peculiar nature of the way in which Ms LBW made her accusations; via the media instead of via the internet and I assumed other media, rather than via the courts. This you felt might be because she felt too much shame about the rape to talk about it ??

    I used to joke to Russell that I learnt at an early age that heroes can have feet of clay. It is fairly pathetic attempt to suggest I’ve only just admitted saying he wasn’t a saint, simply because I only just joined this forum and you don’t know me and had never heard it before.

    I didn’t say ‘people’ generally would not view the rape, I specifically was referring to the people on the Trail of Broken Treaties who, like Russell, were there to raise the issues in the list of points which most people would consider valid and worthwhile.

    Trying to say I resorted to malice towards you is very sad; you have been completely vicious to me, and it’s all over your forum unless you’ve deleted.

    You’ve also gone off on a general tangent again because you can’t answer the simple fact that you have posted unsubstantiated rape allegations and said you have no reason to disbelieve. ‘Malicious?’ I think you wrote the maliciious-book.

    • You can say or interpret whatever you will-but those who read will
      form their own opinions, and that is the way it should be. Perhaps you
      would like to show me and they where exactly I implied you had said
      people “generally” would or wouldn’t do anything?
      You haven’t disappointed me Isobel due to your predictability, but at
      some point I would think you may disappoint yourself-and I see you
      acknowledge that you are “slowly” admitting things-you may find that
      to be a catharsis.
      You say it is good to see I am drawing attention to what you refer to
      as “points”- I agree, because it also draws attention to what you have
      avoided and will not say, and illustrates the inherent weakness of the
      position you take in doing so.
      But it’s show time with this new blog featuring you Isobel-the stage is
      set, well lit, and you need only rehearse your lines and launch yourself
      into Act 2.
      Now I have things to do and will be away from the comp-so make your
      responses and I will reply upon my return.

  2. ‘You say you think it unlikely that people “would calmly sit around and view a rape”, and yet people have calmly sat around for decades viewing the aftermath of AIM’s Reign of ‘ etc.

    I was referring specifically to people on the Trail, who are being accused of having watched whereas you’re referring to a large number of Indian people, who were there specifically because they wanted to raise Indian issues, and maligning them by suggesting they would stand back and watch a rape. There were a large number of women on the Trail, of course.

    You’re back on the twisting again aren’t you, something you do best. You said I was slowly admitting, or just admitting or whatever, and made a total of yourself because I’m not saying anything I haven’t said for years.

    About 2 months ago I was conversing with one of the people who was on the Trail, a man, who was close to Russell at the time. Expect I’ll be talking to him again. Strangely enough in all the anecdotes he ever mentions over the years, he hasn’t referred to this incident. Or anything like it.

    You still haven’t asnwered those ‘points’ have you; no, because you can’t. Because you have this allegation, serious as it is, with no proof, and refuse to respond to anything raised about the strange nature of it.

    Simply because you clearly hate Russell Means, you’ve proven yourself a bigot and you don’t care to look at facts, only what suits your perspective.

    • Yes indeed-strange it is that this is apparently all you have-do you
      honestly think that others fail to see your contrivances-your abject
      refusal to acknowledge or address issues raised?
      What’s next Isobel -will you segue into “I know you are but what am I?”
      or “sticks and stones”?
      For some obscure reason known only to you you seem intent on portraying
      the accusation made against Russell as emanating from me-truth of the
      matter is it didn’t-it appears on this blog as it does elsewhere.
      My response has been that I have no reason to doubt LBW, and certainly won’t
      begin to do so on the basis of your opinion.
      So I say again that I don’t-now you can run with that any way you like, but
      you can’t seriously expect me to point out the flaws in your approach and advise
      you how to address them so they might appear more valid.
      Whether you are capable of it or not it should be obvious I have
      covered all your so called “points”-do I now need to to direct you to
      each one?
      This is supposed to be an exchange between two people-do you expect me
      to conduct it in the first and second person? Should I reply and then
      respond in some meaningful way for you as well?
      Your’s is the stereotypical way of it-no answers, just the same blathering
      over and over again-if you are incapable of anything more say so and
      this conversation will end.

  3. Pingback: Eulogy For Activist Russell Means 1939-2012 | Hegelian Dialectic

  4. isobel-we do not understand these things you say, rezinate always speaks
    in the clear voice and says to look in this place and to look in that place
    to see if this is so and you do not do this same. you are made to say the
    same thing the time and again and never to answer any the question.
    You can not tell us about AIM or these ones rezinates speaks of and you can not
    tell us about the rape and all those bad thing, we know for these things among
    our people and you do not, you read the book and listen only for the ones
    who make the lies and the trouble and say oh yes this is the way it is made
    to be. Do you think those ones who make to lie will say oh yes we are liar?
    this one rezinate is more the man more the warrior than any those other ones
    and we have much the respect for him same as many others are made to.

  5. I’ll have to side with Isobel here. If I had to describe LBW with one word it would be delusional. Her accounts do not make sense on a rational level. Yes, Means “was a lot of things,” but outwardly stupid wasn’t one of them. I find it highly implausible that Means would leisurely rape someone in front of 18 witnesses on a high profile walk, which was swarming with media, just to get back at her father because Fools Crow gave him a Chanupa. This is almost as absurd of an argument as voting for Romney just to block Peltier’s clemency to “save the children of the world.” Why would it be so important for Crow Dog to have this particular Chanupa? Chanupa is an archetype that lives in the realm of Spirit. Every Chanupa is equally sacred because they are all extensions of the original one that was brought by the White Buffalo Calf woman. So it’s not the physical manifestation that is “Holy” but rather the prayers that are made with it and behind it and how it is walked with by the Chanupa carrier. Thus stems the root of LBW delusion. Even if she is the “True Steward,” as Trimbach has proclaimed her, it still does not give her in reality any more importance then any other pipe carrier. The Chanupa does not belong to anybody. It is carried for “the people,” meaning the black, red, yellow and white and all living life. So she is just trying to use that Chanupa to elevate her own self importance and to enforce her anti-Peltier/AIM agenda. He carries his own families medicine bundle. Her claims that it is the actual “calf pipe,” is also dubious in that in another forum someone made a really strong case that the pipe that was gifted to her father was actually one of Fools Crow’s pipe’s from the Sun Dance and not the “Calf Pipe,” but should this even matter? Certainly also the modern design of it would lend itself more to that it’s not the “calf pipe,” that she claims. This also might explain why when I had a dispute with LBW a few years ago, when I reached out to people that were close to Fools Crow, such as the Lone Hill family and Dick Darnell, she shut up really quick. Her and Trimbach even put a block on their FB pages after that. As I’ve stated before, it’s not the Chanupa that you carry but how you walk with it. LBW walks with her Chanupa with Vengence, wishing bad on others as she carries it. This could only cause harm for the people that she wishes bad on and ultimately herself and goes against the two main prayers of the Chanupa, health and help. Where are these 18 witnesses now? She could never find one to stand up for her? I’m not saying that she was raped or that she wasn’t( only her and the Creator really know what really happened) but she wouldn’t be the first woman to cry rape to foster an agenda. Think about all the pro-sports athletes that were suckered in and then taken to court by opportunistic women seeking a monetary settlement. I believe that her anti-AIM agenda is so strong that I would not put it past her to make up a story to further discredit them. So I believe that Isobel is justified as to having doubts of her claim for the reasons that she put forth and the ones that I did.

    • SB-
      Perhaps you should read Helene’s comment if you wonder why Means
      would “leisurely” rape anyone.
      Where are the 18 witnesses you ask? where are the multitude of
      witnesses who knew what went on within WK2-and I don’t mean the
      ones that were murdered and hidden in unmarked graves-but others
      within that estimated two or three hundred who were there?
      All towing the AIM fear, intimidation, or allegiance line huh? All
      but those who have stepped forward that AIM and you now have to contend
      with.
      I wouldn’t flatter yourself about being blocked from sites
      for speaking the truth-more the lack of it and your well known
      penchant to label everyone a fed, sellout, or snitch.
      And of course you “have to side with Isobel” that’s part of your
      job description-as to Russell not being outwardly stupid one could take
      that to mean you believe he was inwardly, but as far as an external
      display a recent one would be the stupidity he displayed at the
      CWS conference in trying to deny Ray Robinson was ever at WK2.
      That wasn’t just stupid, but USDA prime stupid.
      Sure women have made a rape claim when none existed-but is that
      the metric you would apply to all such claims?-pardon me but your
      patriarchy is showing.
      There may be others who will accept you as a sundancing pipe carrying
      keeper of the flame-but I don’t, and we’ve already covered the reasons
      why-so spare me your tutelage about pipes and their significance.
      As to the calf pipe I haven’t seen LBW make that claim while I have
      seen her repeatedly say her’s is another-Fools Crow’s

      • Rezinate, you realise I presume that the people who were around Russell Means on the Trail of Broken Treaties on the dates round the incident could easily be identified, when you state ‘Where are the 18 witnesses you ask? where are the multitude of witnesses who knew what went on within WK2…’. These are not nameless, faceless people whose identities are lost to the mists of time. And you’re making very strong accusations about them.

      • And you want to talk about twisting words Isobel-exactly what “accusations” have I made
        about witnesses? But I’ll say what I have always said- if AIM doesn’t like what I say
        and believes they can prove it is wrong then they need to bring it-let’s go to court
        and we’ll get into everything from ’68 to the present. We’ll get into financial records,
        WK2 and those graves, Annie, every bit of it.

      • ‘Where are the 18 witnesses you ask? where are the multitude of
        witnesses who knew what went on within WK2-and I don’t mean the
        ones that were murdered and hidden in unmarked graves-but others
        within that estimated two or three hundred who were there?’

        Rezinate post to Silent Bear yesterday. Re your commment:
        ‘And you want to talk about twisting words Isobel-exactly what “accusations” have I made
        about witnesses? But I’ll say what I have always said- if AIM doesn’t like what I say’

    • Sorry I’m on UK time and only checked in briefly this a.m. have to go out Thank you, this is very painful and it helps to have some support. And I would totally agree, delusional is the word. Will call back later.

    • SB – you said exactly what I nearly said!! when I first responded, nearly wrote ‘Russell was not stupid enough to rape a woman in front of 18 witnesses’, and then realised that the implication of that was he would in private, which is precisely what rezinate would have said had I written it. Rezinate has twisting down to a fine art, from his posts.

      And these 18 witnesses; true only she and the Creator know what happened, apart from according to her, 18 witnesses. The people who were round Russell Means on that Trail constantly, including round the dates she was talking about, have never said any such thing or anything remotely like it, when describing conversations etc.

      The idea that they were all some bunch of thugs who would turn a blind eye to rape strikes me as unlikely.

  6. P.S- And you yourself have hinted at her delusion. Why would AIM want to kill her father? This sounds like a warped version of, “Lord of the Rings.”Is LBW taking her meds the same way you have accused other women on your blog?What about her paranoia that AIM was bugging her phone? Is that justified and sane?

    • LBW has also said attempts were made to hack her accounts and
      site-in fact were.Since I have in the past had the same experience
      I find it credible-but then I may just be paranoid as you say-after
      all the truth is anathema to you and you’ll take any approach
      but that.
      As to why AIM would want to kill her father- I think that has
      been addressed, and also begs the question why did they kill
      so many?
      As to accusing “women” as in plural of being off their meds can
      you provide an example other than Lizzie-who has been accused of
      that and more across the net with her delusional accusations of
      multiple people being one and the same?
      Now don’t get crazy and think you’ve made a breakthrough in being
      allowed to comment on this blog and begin to flood it with Nazi
      videos and parade of “witnesses” like the multi convicted Pellicano.
      Maybe you would like to provide an example where I have “hinted” that
      LBW is delusional.

    • SB What strikes me, and what I was trying to say, is that she seemed to be awarding herself more significance in the scheme of things that is likely, to say the least. Why would everyone be so interested in her and her father. I know what her given reason is, but you’ve described very fully (and i know it’s been ignored) why that isn’t valid. I am not qualified to comment on the pipe but among Indians it is not just AIM members who have remarked on her claims on that.

      Someone posting as bearsense made the same points and was ignored.

  7. This string of comments brought back to mind a conversation I had with an AIM member from Wanblee, and a friend of Russell Means. He told me that during the party times of Aim on Pine Ridge (the late seventies) , there was a custom, called “training” by those guys. The AIM game was to get young girls drunk and rape them , one guy after another, “train” fashion…… Russell Means was still drinking at the time, and partying with other AIMsters … This man from Wanblee knew I was also a friend of Means whom we discussed often enough.. Perhaps this heinous conduct has nothing to do with the rape reported on this blog, and on the other hand, perhaps it is all part of the same disrespect and abuse of women which characterized the American Indian Movement from the start and for years after WK2. I have a number of stories relating to this type of conduct , and reports that were made to me when I worked with elders on Pine Ridge… I wonder who would believe them….. Isobel, we should not be too quick to dismiss any woman’s allegation of rape, especially given the history of AIM, and the prevalence of rape in that environment, and in those days…. Both Dennis Banks and Russell Means acquired a reputation based on their known conduct…..

  8. Isobel, have you ever considered that SOME on the trail were not there to help, but were USING people like you describe to get money and fame?

    That is presicely what rezinate has been saying for years. SOME in AIM were tricked into believing what they were doing was the real motive. Then money disappeared that was supposed to go to people. In russell’s book he CLAIMS that the money he gave to others was used up for drinking and drugs.

    He has always said that many in AIM didn’t know what the leadership was actually doing.

    I would also ask, have you ever lived through fear tactics?

    Some things happened with a member of my family that I didn’t allow myself to remember until she was dead. Somewhere deep inside I was protecting a part of me from being hurt by her, and once she was gone, she couldn’t hurt me anymore.

    Many women remember what happened to them, but are so afraid to tell they will stay silent. More so if they were young when it happened. The younger they are the more afraid they can feel.

    I am a man, have stood up to very scary people, and they backed down. But the things I went through as a child dictated things I had no understanding of.

    Fear, and the trauma caused by it can deny all logic on the face of it. But once you know the roots, you can uproot it.

    I would also ask you, have you ever lived with an abuser?

  9. My brother had a 13 year old girl accuse him of raping her when he was 12 to keep from having to admit to her parents who she was carrying on with, who was 24 if I recall. I have had women who were interested in me claim things that weren’t true.

    I am no fan of these kinds of women. But I have also spoken to far more women who were molested or raped and never spoke of it. The pain they carry is easily seen if you are empathic, and the liars are easy to spot if you are looking for the truth.

    I would never EVER fight for a woman who made a false claim. But instead would fight against her.

      • It was, but her whole family was in trouble of some sort, and she learned from older family members bad things that allowed her to be preyed on by that man.

        It was very scary for my brother. But he was also very angry. None of our family thought he might have done it.

        She changed her story from rape, to consensual, to admission. She was pregnant, and my mother said she would demand a DNA test.

        A false accusation can be very harmful as well. It was very difficult for my brother to trust women after that.

        That’s one reason I do not take those accusations lightly. Also there is in me the old system of law that requires a death sentence for rape, and false accusations have no room in that system.

        You know what I mean by that, it was a law of your people as well wasn’t it?

      • Tali -very possible a family member would taken things into their
        own hands, if not then banning, which could amount to a death
        sentence at the hands of an enemy in being caught out alone,
        would have been the way of it.
        I think if banning were in play today a lot of problems would
        have been resolved and others would not even occur.
        Banning today would probably result in law suits or some
        sort of legal action regarding “rights”.
        Shunning could be a different story though.
        My position is that if a virus exists in the physical body it
        is addressed-any that exist in the communal body should be
        as well.
        No one nurtures a virus within their body, and it doesn’t make
        sense to me to do so within the community.

  10. Looks like it cut off part of my comment.

    I would never EVER fight for a woman who made a false claim. But instead would fight against her.

    BUT, I would also never EVER assume a woman lied because others have.

    Rape is a life long crime. Even if a woman can overcome the rape itself, there are resulting factors that effect her life from then on.

    I have seen few women who fully recovered with no lasting effects, it is very very difficult to do.

    To attempt to minimize it even a sliver is utter disrespect of women in my opinion. It is much more damaging than murder, no doubt. It can be a life long torture.

    • Tali -not intentional on this end, just a glitch or something-but better not to
      pay much attention to it or SB will say we are delusional and paranoid.

    • I read your previous post Tali Uquelugv and am very sorry about your experiences in your family.

      Rape is a terrible thing and as you say, not something easily, if ever overcome. I think sometimes (especially as a woman) it is easy to believe a rape allegation, too easy, out of empathy for the victim. I find a number of aspects of LBW’s account extremely odd, and inconsistent with what others have described what was going on the Trail. On a personal level, I have found the attacks on Russell Means immediately following his death, which have been vitriolic, very upsetting.

      Rezinate frequently illustrates he doesn’t know much about the man and appears to have a vendetta against him/AIM bordering on rabid.

      • Depends on how you see the top rung of AIM back then. Depends on if you accept certain things that are hard to deny or disprove. It also depends on how well you sniff out lies.

        It also depends on how well you know human nature. How thoroughly you look into what has happened since AIM entered the picture. What they have left in their wake when certain members got envolved. How well you understand the various dynamics of traditions. How they vary from each other, and how vastly different they are from american and european societies.

        For instance. Did you know that the most traditional first nations Elders will never be found on the internet? Did you know that the best way to find ACCURATE information is to LIVE near the people, earn trust over years, and speak personally to people?

        Do you know that there is NO WAY a normal person can learn the truth of certain things without living in them? That no one will talk about certain things even now? That so many things are covered up by people who don’t want secrets to come out?

        That things set in motion in the 70s were just first steps to develop things that are full blown problems now?

  11. I think it was on my end, hands too big for the keyboard. I seriously doubt it was even related to wordpress, much less your doing. But I see what you mean from his comments, truth and evidence doesn’t matter much if you can stir people up. Very political of him.

  12. -the words and comments of Isobel and Silent Bear are hateful and cause hurt and makes me sick to my stomach…

    -I know LBW, have sat in her kitchen and been made welcome, have enjoyed her friendship and respect and dignity…

    -she is heyoka, a gift from Creator, and she can handle the likes of you and all those who are filled with hate and rage.

    -you are the provocoteurs, the ones who protect through sophistry and false logic, attacks and insults, sheer volume of noise and abuse, those that you worship… AIM, 3 generations, Peltier, Leonard Crow Dog, Arvol Looking Horse, and many other scamster abusers of not only Lakota, Nakota and Dakotas, but of the Sacred…

    -your job is to cast doubt on LBW’s story, by provocatively suggesting that some things about the story are true, or maybe some things about the story may not be true… therefore nothing is true, therefore she is lying and certainly is not telling the truth…

    -you did the same thing at the Wounded Knee 2 conference, you do the same thing with any attempts at the truth coming out…

    -you are the pit bulls, designed to lie cheat and steal, because you believe with all your heart and soul, that the ideological goals of AIM justify the means… good will come out of all this…

    -understand that a lie is a lie, and just like all followers of scumbags, you will vanish into thin air in an attempt to distance yourself once the garbage hits the fan… which is fast approaching by the way

    -oh by the way, Silent Bear, you have screamed and whined daily at LBW for years… the most powerful thing you said and asked her is “Why don’t you post me, important me, up on your website?”

    -I guess you have your answer.

    • Sometimes Joan despite a persons best efforts the only option they
      have is to speak forcefully-I’d say you have just done so and good that
      you have.
      This is SB’s stock in trade, to prowl the net more as AIM’s pet poodle
      posing as an attack dog and then wail and moan when people become fed up
      with it.
      Nothing honorable in it, and nothing worthy of respect, or worth even
      approving his comments.
      I’ll readily admit than in comparison to earlier comments he has made
      throughout this blog he’s toned it down a bit, but there is a reason for
      that.
      It being that he wants access to promote the AIM/Peltier agenda and
      further ingratiate himself with his handlers.
      Even if he can’t accept it he is in fact being dragged down with them,
      but if they were all to admit their guilt I believe no apology would
      be forthcoming on his behalf and he would continue in the same vein
      ignoring everything just as he does now.
      SB cannot alter so much as an iota of the truth-someday he may come
      to realize and accept that.
      Someday he may come to understand what the pipe and the responsibilities
      are in carrying one.Someday he may come to understand that we fight to
      remain who we are and have been-not some bastardized hybrid AIM/ Crow Dog
      version.

  13. Isobel, et al.~As to why anyone (including LBW) didn’t bring charges of rape to the courts in 1972.

    1) “An updated definition of rape was meant to come from the perspective of the victim. The act of rape was asserted to be a way in which societal gender roles, the way someone acts out either masculinity or femininity, were enforced and the hierarchy of power placing males above females was maintained Rape was thus defined as a form of violence used to ensure male power, a form of social control over women and children.” Mary E. Odem and Jody Clay- Warner from “Confronting Rape and Sexual Assault” 1997.

    2) “The anti-rape movement began by women breaking the silence on the issues of rape and the damages incurred as a result. The feminist movement first began to take notice of the low levels of rape convictions, especially in New York, and realized that rape was not taken seriously in the court of law from the victim’s side. The movement then began to fight not only for rape law reform, but in many cases it was fighting for the repeal and revision of such laws.In New York in 1971, one of the strictest states on rape claims, their law forced victims to provide evidence for force, penetration, and identity of the perpetrator all before the case could even go to trial. These harsh guidelines and requirements made women feel unsafe in their own neighborhoods, in their own homes, and out on the streets. It was groups such as the Women for a Free Future that spoke out for law reforms to protect women and their rights” Maria Bevacqua from “Rape On The Public Agenda” 2000.

    3) Rape Shield Laws were not signed into law in most states (and by the Carter Administration) until the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. “Assault on credibility was a common tactic used in rape trials. Such investigation of the sexual background of complainants made them reluctant to go to trial. The enactment of rape shield laws helped to provide further protection for rape victims during trial. These laws were created to restrict the past sexual history of the victim from being used against them during the trial.These laws were proposed because it was feared that jurors would judge a complainant based on their history and use that for judgment on their current credibility and moral character.” Morrison Torrey from “When Will We Be Believed?” 1991. Even if someone had never engaged in sexual activity, their moral character could be examined under suspicion. In addition these laws met roadblocks, delays and appeals in many states.

    Again, I would encourage anyone to watch the documentary.
    http://current.com/shows/vanguard/92468120_rape-on-the-reservation.htm

    • I’d certainly be the last person to dismiss how serious rape is. But this is an allegation about a specific rape.

      The reason that LBW gave for not reporting the rape at the time was fear about her father (if you read what she said), not any of the reasons you gave.

      When I asked her in response to her blog here why she didn’t report it subsequently, she failed to reply.

      Rezinate, whose arguments lack logic to an almost stunning degree, came up with the interesting theories that LBW didn’t report the rape because it is something that causes shame for women and is difficult to talk about. So she could talk about it all over the internet repeatedly, but couldn’t report it to the criminal justice system because of the ‘shame’.

      Another theory Rezinate suggested was that she was afraid of Russell Means/AIM intimidation; clearly not, because again, she has talked about it all over the internet.

      Rezinate also suggested that LBW would have been afraid the allegation would not have been taken seriously by law enforcement so wouldn’t have reported it for that reason. This is completely implausible, they would have been only too happy to bring charges against Russell Means and get him locked up for anything.

      By talking about it publicly, but not bringing charges, she avoided the investigation of the incident charges would have resulted it and removed from Russell Means the appropriate response in legal defence.

      The majority of women who have been raped would find it impossible to do as LBW has, talk so openly and so much about the experience, publicly.

      • Isobel-the lack of logic in my arguments is so stunning that as Mary pointed out
        a “shield law” was enacted to address them.

        “Rezinate also suggested that LBW would have been afraid the allegation would not
        have been taken seriously by law enforcement so wouldn’t have reported it for that
        reason. This is completely implausible, they would have been only too happy to bring
        charges against Russell Means and get him locked up for anything.”

        This perhaps more than anything you’ve said previously illustrates how little you
        understand or know about life on the rez where rape is the highest among any
        demographic in the entirety of this country-and prosecutions the lowest-which at
        one point hovered around eighty percent that weren’t prosecuted-breeds a lot of
        confidence doesn’t it?
        Having zero familiarity with rez life or the issues that face our communities you
        assume an awful lot in attempting to speak with what you obviously believe is an
        authoritive voice.
        Take a minute if you dare and watch the Rape on the Rez link Mary provided and then
        come back and tell us how it really is according to you. Tell us that the British
        cultural realities are the same as ours.

      • Are you a total fool? You do realise the rape was nowhere near a rez I take it? ‘Life on the rez’ is one thing, the Trail is something else.

        I repeat, rape anywhere,and the high occurrence on reservations, is terrible.
        But rape on the rez has nothing to do with the Trail which was not on a rez.

        Plus, with all your rambling about Russell Means, you appear to have no idea how much desire there was to lock him up,

        But you are shifting arguments yet again,because the reason LBW gave for not reporting the rape was about her father, not the reasons you are trying to think up now.

        Plus, many women on reservations do report rape, they may not get the right respone but that doesn’t stop them reporting.

      • Getting a little desperate are you Isobel?-on rez and off rez are definitely two
        different things, two different worlds-but the AIM attitude of dominance didn’t
        recognize such boundaries-but then I suppose you are as much an expert concerning
        that as you have attempted to portray yourself in other aspects.
        A reality is that in even urban communities much of the rez mentality prevails.
        Are you attempting to say they confined all their criminal activities to the rez?
        How about Cleveland AIM and that 35k Russell split with Weitzel, was that on the
        rez?
        How about his assault on his one armed then eighty year old father-in- law, while
        it was on the Dine rez was it on his rez? An eighty year old one armed elder, think
        about that.Suppose it was your father or grandfather-or even just someone in
        your community-you would be outraged rather than defending the assailant wouldn’t
        you?
        And what about that assault Isobel, will you attempt to qualify that with the
        “controversial figure” free pass? Will you attempt the same with the 35k, or
        Helene’s comment that both he and Banks have a reputation based on known behaviour?
        Will you call Helene a liar when she relates the AIM “initiation” ritual?
        Do you think Mary likewise a fool for posting the rape on the rez link, or
        M+J to comment they do understand where you’re trying to go with all this
        and you must think we are a stupid people?
        How about Tali who asks if you understand that our real elders aren’t
        promoting themselves on the net? What about Joan whose had enough and saying
        it like it is-nothing for her either? Or Nicole-have you forgotten her name
        in your avoidance haste?
        Are you that big a fool? Address some of this comments Isobel if you would
        have any credibility whatsoever.
        There are a growing number of people who suspect that one or more within the AIM
        hierarchy were/are actually informants themselves, and would explain the lack of
        prosecution.
        When everything is factored in as a “theory” it gains credibility.
        Just as an aside I can’t help but notice you are studiously avoiding the comments and
        questions made by others in response to you-is there a reason you would like to share
        for doing so? Are they too difficult?
        Like I said-if you would attempt to portray my opinions as being singular take a look
        at some of the recommended sites, take a look at comments throughout the entirety of
        this blog.
        You have the luxury in your distress of knowing Russell’s death was a “natural” one, and
        in being so it will pass in time-the survivors of AIM’s victims don’t have that same
        opportunity-the only solace for them will come in the form of justice and the closure it
        will bring.
        What solace is to be found for those who weren’t murdered but brutalized, intimidated,
        threatened, or raped?

  14. Thank-you all for your kind comments about my rape by Means…
    As for those like Silent Bear & his group of AIM non-Native supporters & enablers, I could care less what they think or say about me.
    For without AIM & their little smear campaign jobs for AIM against legitimate 1st Nations people, they would have no culture identity at all. Obviously their own heritage is not enough for them, being cultural & spiritual vampires is all they really are, for they show by their vulgarity & profanity of this situation many women on the rez & elsewhere have had to face & deal with, with their lack of sensitivity or kindness solely belonging to that of the insincere.
    Bless all of you who celebrate & share in the truth…
    This type of slanderous behavior is to discourage others to come forward, do not allow that to happen.
    BTW:
    Anyone who wishes to continue to slander me, just send contact info for legal council to send you a cease & desist…especially you, STUPID BEAR…
    Can’t make it in the music biz, so this is your side job?
    I could go through everything I stated & why I shared what I did about my experiences with Means & AIM, but folks like these are just not worth the effort, & only show & prove to people… by their attitudes, words & actions, they have no idea what they are talking about, & are just programmed to respond to any negativity against their heros & role models in this sick manner.
    Pilamayaye yelo…Wakan Tanka

  15. Thank you for this one Joan to speak the true words and we are made
    to see in this day this one Isobel still to talk the round and the round and
    to say nothing same for the silent bear.
    this english is the language these ones were born to but they do not seem
    to understand it and say oh no it is this and it is that and what this one reziante
    has said dos mean the one thing but the other. It is a silly way way for these
    ones to be and they must think we are the stupid people.

    • M+J-apparently they do believe we are a stupid people, and as you pointed
      out don’t even understand their own language.
      But in their attempts to spin and distort they invariably trip themselves
      up.

  16. This is the 20 Point Position Paper which was the central focus of the Trail of Broken Treaties. With apologies to the BIA for possible breachb of copyright in bringing it over here.

    This is what people including Russell Means were preoccupied with on the Trail.

    Just leaving this for Rezinate who apparently doesn’t understand what was going on at the time of the incident alleged.

    Summary of the Twenty-Point Position Paper

    The following is a summary of the Twenty-Point Position Paper that was drawn up by the American Indians who were participating in the Trail of Broken Treaties. The paper was meant to reestablish the sovereignty of the Indian Nations.
    1.The United States Federal Government should retract the component of the 1871 Indian Appropriations Act which eliminated the power of the Indian Nations to contract constitutionally bound treaties with the U.S. government.
    2.The U.S. Federal Government should establish a Treaty Commission that will have the power to contract new treaties to ensure the future of the Indian Nations. In addition, it should be established that no terms of existing treaties can be violated.
    3.The Federal Government should pledge that they will meet with four American Indian representatives before June 2, 1974 in order to discuss the future of the Indian Nations. The national media should be present for this meeting.
    4.The President of the United States should establish a committee consisting of both Indians and non-Indians to examine treaty commitments and violations.
    5.Treaties that have not been ratified should be presented to the Senate.
    6.All American Indian peoples should be considered to be in treaty relations with the United States Federal Government.
    7.The United States Federal Government should ensure that there is judicial enforcement and protection of the treaty rights of American Indians.
    8.The United States Federal Government should provide a new system of federal court jurisdiction through which American Indians can address treaty or tribal rights. This system of jurisdiction must apply both in cases between American Indians and between American Indians and non-Indians. It is of utmost importance that leaders of the Indian Nations take part in the process of interpreting treaties.
    9.The Congress of the United States should relinquish their control over Indian Affairs and instead create a joint committee. This committee is to be called the “Committee on Reconstruction of Indian Relations and Programs”. The members of the committee must be will to commit significant amounts of their time to restructure Indian relations in America.
    10.By July 4, 1976 the United States Federal Government should restore a permanent Native American land area of no less than 110 million acres (450,000 km2). This area should be perpetually non-taxable by the federal government. In addition the Termination Acts of the 1950s and 1960s should be immediately repealed.
    11.There should be a revision of 25 U.S.C. 163. This revision will call for all Indian rights to be restored to individuals that have lost them due to issues with enrollment. In addition, American Indians must be able to qualify for membership in more than one tribe and not be prohibited from receiving dual benefits.
    12.Congress must repeal state laws passed under the Public Law 280. PL280 allows for people not belonging to the Indian community to gain control over governing in reservation areas. The law takes away American Indian’s ability to govern themselves without external conflict.
    13.All violent offenses against Indians should be treated as federal crimes and the persons committing the crimes must face penalties under federal prosecution. Congress should also create a national federal Indian grand jury. This grand jury should consist only of Indians that are chosen by the President as well as by Indian people. In addition this jury will have jurisdiction over non-Indian peoples living on Indian reservations.
    14.The Bureau of Indian Affairs should be dismantled by 1976 and a new government structure that maintains Indian-Federal relations should be established.
    15.The new structure that will replace the Bureau of Indian Affairs will be called the “Office of Federal Indian Relations and Community Reconstruction”.
    16.The “Office of Federal Indian Relations and Community Reconstruction” will promote equality between the Indian Nations and the federal government and seek to remedy the wrong-doings of the federal government against the American Indians.
    17.Congress should enact a statute that allows for trade, commerce, and transportation of Indians to remain outside the jurisdiction of the federal government. American Indians within reservation areas should have immunity from federal and state taxation.
    18.The United States government should recognize and protect the spiritual and cultural integrity of the Indian Nations.
    19.Forms of Indian organization should be consolidated so as to regain the unification of the Indian Nations.
    20.The United States Federal Government should focus on the improvement and creation of better housing, education, employment and economic development for the American Indians.

    • If you would attempt to instruct me on indigenous issues and treaties I’d say
      your arrogance knows no bounds.
      But I would recommend you look up a few Supreme Court rulings like the
      1905 one that treaties with the nations wasn’t a ceding of rights by
      them but a giving of restricted rights to others. You should also
      note that that the SC has stated previously that such treaties are to
      be recognized as the supreme law of the land.
      Try reading A Basic Call to Conciousness if you would like to understand
      the issues better and the basis of this position paper.
      Forget authors like Means and Banks with their self serving agendas and
      look to others, look to people like Matthew King.
      But I’ve been thinking about this personal distress you employ to
      validate your positions and words.
      Have you considered the distress, the duress, the nations have faced,
      or that of the survivors of the victims of WK2? What about the distress
      of AIM’s Reign of terror-of rape victims, of Annie and Ray’s family,
      of Williams and Colers families? What about the distress of the one armed
      eighty old man and of the Dine nation when Russell did all in his power
      to denounce and deny them the sovereignty that is rightfully theirs.
      his attempt to do so could have set the struggle back decades-but that
      was who he was-he didn’t give a damn about anything or anyone unless it
      served him as an individual.

      • You’re previous writing suggested that you thought the alleged incident was on a reservation, and the way you write about the people on the Trail, implying you think rape was likely and that 18 people on the Trail would have witnessed, indicates you don’t know what they were thinking/preoccupied with at the time.

        Your previous post (and others before) imply that you think because there are, tragically, many rapes on reservatiions, the claim Russell Means raped someone in 1972 must be true. That is not very logical thinking.

        And you’re veering off in all directions, I was responding on the specific allegation. Your objection to other matters related to AIM does not make Russell Means automatically guilty of rape which is effectively what you’re suggesting.

        If you look at what you wrote.

      • That’s the funny thing about opinions isn’t it Isobel-one can read into them
        what they like depending on an agenda.

        “Your previous post (and others before) imply that you think because there are,
        tragically, many rapes on reservatiions, the claim Russell Means raped someone
        in 1972 must be true. That is not very logical thinking”

        Nor is it “logical” thinking to dismiss that if AIM was the peoples movement
        they attempted to portray themselves as and Russell was the great voice of
        matriarchy that he and they would fail to actively addressed the issue of
        rape on the rez-yet we see he and they did not, and do not.
        But there’s a reason for that-one would be the can of worms it would open,
        the attention it would draw to the reality of rez life, to AIM, to the “initiation”
        rituals Helene spoke of, and also to Banks well known and established penchant
        for young girls.
        As Helene stated both Means and Banks had a reputation based on known behavior,
        it is that known behavior that adds credibility to accusations made against them.
        Does or should that imply that based soley on their known character they are guilty?
        No, but when an accusation is made it is something to consider wouldn’t you say?
        Since LBW has no involvement with the criminal activities of AIM, and no criminal
        record that I am aware of should that be a consideration as well? I’d say it is.
        This known behavior Isobel by people on the rez-not someone like you who sits
        off in the distance billing and cooing over romantic images they’ve constructed.

  17. It seems one that Russell Means should have been suspect as a Fed, since he walked in two high-profile cases. Charged with assault, larceny and conspiracy as a leader in the armed, 71-day standoff at Wounded Knee 1973, the case against Means was DISMISSED FOR PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT.

    Murder charges are filed against Means and Richard Marshall, an AIM member, for the shooting death of Martin Montileaux at the Longbranch Saloon in Scenic, South Dakota. MEANS WAS ACQUITTED BUT MARSHALL SERVED 24 YEARS IN PRISON.

    Read more:http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/10/22/russell-means-a-look-at-his-journey-through-life-141444 http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/10/22/russell-means-a-look-at-his-journey-through-life-141444#ixzz2BZRO0vdB

    AND THEY THOUGHT ANNIE MAE WAS A FED? Excuse me, have I missed something here?

    Isobel, better do yourself a favor and read what AIM Grand Governing Council really thought of Means and I’ve provided the link as well.http://www.aimovement.org/moipr/onrussellmeans.html

    Too many rotten things were adding up to make the rest look bad in the barrel of rotten apples.

    • Exactly so Mary-and no doubt will start another round of defensive denials,
      though I suspect Isobel is on the verge of foregoing further comment.
      If I had to pick only one who I felt who had rolled over when it served
      their best interest it would be Means-but I suspect at some point they
      all have in one way or another.
      I’m still trying to figure out how Banks has been able to skate around
      and how Clyde got not much more than a slap on the wrist for his drug
      dealing and classification as a major drug dealer.
      The latest approach is to imply it was DeLuca/ Blackhorse who rolled
      on Peltier but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was AIM and then
      have covered themselves for years with all the free Leonard BS.
      No honor among thieves as they say-neither would I think among murderers
      and rapists.
      Bottomline Isobel, and though you haven’t answered the question about
      “donating”, is that you’ve been scammed-whether you donated or not,
      but you’re not alone in that as there countless who were, are, and will be.
      The only difference being is that it wasn’t one of those Nigerian princes
      or princesses.

      The below link provides one example-and as you will see
      in reading it white people have presented a target rich environment,
      perhaps because the majority of indigenous people knew which
      way the wind was blowing and don’t have the financial resources.
      Take a look at a Crow Dog’s site (the second link) notice how
      it is tailored to the Japanese-that’s beacuse they have money
      and aren’t familiar with our reality just as you aren’t.
      Crow Dog is even selling on Cafepress.
      Then look at the third and fourth links and see that Dennis Banks
      likes him some Japanese as well.
      It’s all about the money Isobel -always has been-and in pursuing
      it they will say whatever they think the persons wants to hear,
      they will play whatever role they think will work.

      http://www.dickshovel.com/sav2.html

      http://www.swnkacangi.com/

      http://www.facebook.com/events/332453554511/

      http://aimcollection.org/taxonomy/term/99

      • I don’t know what made you think I’m on the verge of foregoing another comment but here I am again.

        I’m not precisely sure what you’re impling now but it seems as if you’re saying that low sentences or dropped charges indicate that Russell Means, Clyde Bellecourt and Dennis Banks are all secretly Feds.

        ‘I’m still trying to figure out how Banks has been able to skate around
        and how Clyde got not much more than a slap on the wrist for his drug
        dealing and classification as a major drug dealer.’

        —-
        You’re virtually arguing against yourself here; one minute you’re denouncing them for being AIM the next you’re implying they were on the Fed payroll, or something.

        I’ve already told you several times, I knew Russell and was not ‘scammed’. However if you think he was a Fed, then you’ve been scammed.

      • “I don’t know what made you think I’m on the verge of foregoing another comment
        but here I am again.”
        Yes here you again Isobel, but the sun also rises daily. The above comment you
        cite was predicated on the avoidance you’ve exhibited to questions and as you
        say “points” made by others.

        “You’re virtually arguing against yourself here; one minute you’re denouncing them
        for being AIM the next you’re implying they were on the Fed payroll, or something.”
        Only in your hall of mirrors Isobel-at some point or another they’ve denounced one
        another-do you take that to mean they denounced AIM?
        Well we know Russell certainly did during at least one of six, yes count them, that
        would be six retirements from AIM when he set up his own version and claimed he in
        fact was AIM.
        He effectively did the same when accusing Vernon as being the equivalent of the evil
        Dr. Ming.
        And what’s this? You avoid responding to any of the links I provided for your perusal?
        I wouldn’t necessarily refer to that as arguing against yourself, more running around
        in circles chasing yourself.
        It may be a little beyond your grasp but there are countless things to take issue
        with related to AIM-and since AIM is composed of individuals that reflect on it
        as entity one can also take issue with the individuals and no vagary exists.

        “I’m not precisely sure what you’re impling now but it seems as if you’re saying that
        low sentences or dropped charges indicate that Russell Means, Clyde Bellecourt and Dennis
        Banks are all secretly Feds.”

        Now that’s something of a stretch isn’t it Isobel? Perhaps you failed to notice that
        it was Mary who referenced “dropped charges”, or maybe just another example of avoidance.
        As to the uncharacteristic leniency shown to Clyde as one who was busted with a huge amount
        of drugs and classified as a major drug dealer many ask same question, and for good reason,
        such things are well known to be the result of what is referred to as “plea bargaining” and
        invariably involve rolling over on others.
        Could you provide an example of another major drug dealer who only served a paltry two
        years-especially when are being sold in proximity to schools? Is it in your nature to excuse
        such offenses on the basis that the offender belongs to an organization you like?
        Now again Isobel-would you offer an opinion about Russell assaulting his then eighty
        year old father in law and his attempt to kick sovereignty not only for the Dine but all
        the nations under the bus-or does that merely add to your distress and leave you claim
        I’m arguing against myself?
        I think ultimately you didn’t know Russell at all-you knew what he presented to you and
        what you wanted to believe. Either that or you are in complete denial-either way I’d
        say you were indeed scammed.

      • ‘I’m still trying to figure out how Banks has been able to skate around
        and how Clyde got not much more than a slap on the wrist for his drug
        dealing and classification as a major drug dealer.’

        This was your comment yesterday I believe.

        “You’re virtually arguing against yourself here; one minute you’re denouncing them
        for being AIM the next you’re implying they were on the Fed payroll, or something.”
        Only in your hall of mirrors Isobel-at some point or another they’ve denounced one
        another-do you take that to mean they denounced AIM?’

        Sorry, the point was you are implying they had Fed involvement re the comment about inexplicable short sentences. Yes they denounced each other,the leadership was fragmenting and falling out by 1975, and continued in that way in years following.

        It’s the lack of logic in your arguments I am addressing, with your twisting back and forth as per usual,

        ‘Now that’s something of a stretch isn’t it Isobel? Perhaps you failed to notice that
        it was Mary who referenced “dropped charges”, or maybe just another example of avoidance.
        As to the uncharacteristic leniency shown to Clyde as one who was busted with a huge amount
        of drugs and classified as a major drug dealer many ask same question, and for good reason,
        such things are well known to be the result of what is referred to as “plea bargaining” and
        invariably involve rolling over on others.’
        ———————-

        No I didn’t fail to notice that Mary seems to take the Bellecourt line, including her quote of the Grand Council of Aim statement on Russell Means.

        I was referring to your implicatiion about Banks and C Bellecourt, as above.

        ‘Isobel-would you offer an opinion about Russell assaulting his then eighty
        year old father in law and his attempt to kick sovereignty not only for the Dine but all
        the nations under the bus-or does that merely add to your distress and leave you claim
        I’m arguing against myself?’

        ————-
        I expressed an opinion at the time, to Russell privately and to several others. I also wrote to Judge Yazzie as the case was getting so much media attention, didn’t get a response but didn’t expect one.

        Russell argued he wouldn’t get a fair trial and that the Navajo Nation should not be allowed to try non member Indians. He got criticised for undermining Indian Nation sovereignty for that.

        Judge Yazzie was talking a lot at that time in general terms about the Navajo form of justice, not penalising people but bringing everyone back by sitting around I suppose you could say, I don’t mean that to sound rude, but by talking and restoring relationships. Rather than bringing criminal charges and having a trial.

        Now here is an interesting one; he thought this should apply to rapists, too. No need for trial, just the Navajo style form of restoring relationships. I should think there is still plenty of literatrue available.

        But Russell Means’ behaviour Judge Yazzie decided, was so heinous that he should be prosecuted and tried. That was why I wrote to him, which probably really irritated him, because I found it odd that he could be so ‘forgiving’ of rape but so hardline about Russell Means lashing out in temper, which as everyone knows, was something he had a track record of as he admitted.

        He felt, and it’s public, Judge Yazzie was not impartial. That was his opinion. Iam not qualified to comment, but I did find the difference between attitude to rape and attitude to Russell’s incident interesting and conflicting.

      • Well Isobel you can write to the Supreme Court if you
        like and it doesn’t alter the FACTS, not withstanding
        whatever argument Russell made attempting to spin it.
        The FACTS are that if Russell’s argument had an ounce
        of validity then anyone could go anywhere, commit a crime,
        and then make the same argument.
        This is the classic Russell can take a dump on anyone line
        and then if any effort was made to hold him accountable he
        threw himself on the ground having a tantrum wailing and crying
        about an attempt to victimize him-and myopic delusional
        people like you without any idea of the issues or implications
        buy into it.
        It’s apparent you have no idea what the concept of sovereignty
        means to the nations, the very real threat Russell’s attempt to
        subvert it for all the nations meant, or for that matter
        like Russell gave a rip whether we ever have it or not.
        You’re just a mindless drone sitting at a distance spewing
        Russellisms and embarrassing yourself in the process.
        Interesting that you can’t bring yourself to admit it was
        a heinous crime committed against an ELDER, a handicapped eighty
        year old one at that-it was just a loss of temper-in lieu of that
        you present what Russell “thought” as a defense….now as you like
        to say that is pathetic, twisted, and sick.
        And here’s a clue for you-the Dine prosecute rapists, they
        prosecute thieves and murderers. “restoring” relationships
        may be a part of that, but accountability is as well.
        If it’s all about restoring relationships as you say why do they
        have a jail-why do they prosecute bootleggers, which is a lesser
        offense than rape? Why do they prosecute drug offenses, and yes
        Isobel, even assault?
        Why do they have a tribal court?
        “Russell argued he wouldn’t get a fair trial and that the Navajo
        Nation should not be allowed to try non member Indians. He got
        criticised for undermining Indian Nation sovereignty for that.”

        So by this self serving metric then you support Russell’s contention
        that anyone who wasn’t a tribal member could commit any crime
        they wanted to among the Dine with no fear of prosecution?
        Can you tell me of a single place on earth where that is possible?
        Would you say that someone who isn’t a Brit should be allowed
        to go to the UK and do likewise? Or you as one should be able to
        do the reverse?
        “He got criticised for undermining Indian Nation sovereignty for
        that”.
        He surely did, and deservedly so-and yet here you are attempting
        to do the same thing as your boat people ancesters did with their
        colonialism, their raping and pillaging of OUR land, OUR people,
        OUR sovereignty.
        A mindset and Manifest Destiny attitude crystallized in, and fine
        tuned by you and Russell.
        I’d bet anything you were played like a violin in being told
        that classic line of Russell’s that you were a reverse apple-white
        outside and red inside-that you had a red heart-probably even gave
        you some bogus “Indian” name, and you went for it hook, line, and
        sinker and then laughed his way to the bank to make a deposit.
        You aren’t a friend of the nations-you’re a groupie, something
        the nations need to be saved from, just as we needed to be saved from
        Russell, and now from AIM.

        “Iam not qualified to comment”-the truist thing you’ve said thus far.

        I support sovereignty for each nation-they have the right to
        govern within the boundaries of their land, they have the right to
        enforce their laws-it’s that simple, and no feeble insipid “defense”
        made by you or Russell changes that opinion or the concept and
        pursuit of it-neither does your second guessing or liberal interpretations
        of Yazzie.

        “He felt, and it’s public, Judge Yazzie was not impartial.” What this really
        means is that Yazzie wasn’t partial to Russell-he wasn’t impressed by Russell’s
        crafted persona, nor intimidated by it.
        This is just another example of the extremes you will go to, like your latest
        comment in the Whoopi Goldberg blog I just responded to.

        Let’s not attempt to restrict this to rapes in 2012-there is long history of it
        that has increased following the examples and gang mentality of AIM.
        I wonder how many hours, days, weeks, months, years, you’ve dutifully devoted
        running around with a shovel attempting to clean up after Russell?
        Get a life Isobel-that’s what we’re trying do.

    • No he was not a Fed, Mary. Of that I think we can all be certain.

      He had a massive fall out with other AIM leaders back in the 70s, I am aware of the AIM Governing Council statement already.

      • Right so let us get it right out there then; you are saying charges were lenient because….? Explain. Since you wish to elaborate.

        You are writing about someone, Russell, I knew for many years, the private person not the public.
        You denounce him,with your pathetic twisting and lies, and I will defend him

        Fact remains and tomorrow,or the next day,I will repeat the points. You are dancing around desperately avoiding answering relevant points on the issue raised, because you can’t.

        And now you blame Mary for implying Fed nvolvement, you’re pathetic. Yes she did, but so did you.
        Big man there, squealing ‘no a woman said that,not me’.

        Russell would find this funny, in an angry sort of way. You’re pathetic.

        Answer the points re the rape claim. Oh I forgot sorry,you’re just interested in attacking people, you’re not interested in answering real points

        I don’t give a d*mn what you think or how malicious, vicious and warped you are. Your problem,not mine,not Russell’s

        But you keep attacking a friend of his who loved him, like the sick weirdo you are, because that proves how sad and sick your arguments are. So just keep bringing it on, really. Just keep proving what you are.

      • Oh no Isobel-not blaming Mary in the least despite how you attempt to spin
        it-merely making the obvious point that you can’t even give attribution
        correctly as part of your avoidance and denial.
        Now if you want to ramp it up in desperation allow me to say that I don’t
        give damn what your delusional, twisted, opinions are-that they sicken
        me in the same way Joan says she is sickened by them.
        Try to avoid proving who you are by answering a single direct
        question with a single direct answer-like the oft repeated one re
        your idol and his assault upon and aged one armed man? In doing so
        explain the his heroism in doing so.
        If you refuse to then you’re done here and you can it what it like-but
        this predictable tactic of dancing around and resorting to name calling
        in lieu of any display of intelligence and integrity of position is
        well know-it’s what you people do, it’s all you’ve got, isn’t going
        to fly here.
        You can’t even “defend” the positions you take-what a leap of faith to
        assume you can “defend” Russell or anyone else.

  18. Iosbell you are the big silly one to talk the round the round
    and never to say any thing never to answer the question.
    We have asked the question for you to and we said words
    but dos not matter to you and we are made to see why.
    we are made to see if rezinate would ask why or to say
    we have said a thing you would make more the silly talk
    that he would make the blame for us.
    you do not have points you have this talk around and so we
    would say this one Russell Means and this AIM are the big
    liars and we think to you have been this scammed, and we
    say if you do not answer our words we would have rezinate
    to say we have said them and ask why you do not answer.
    we say we would believe this one the looking back woman
    before Russell Means or AIM and before we would believe
    any thing you would say.
    we live in this land and we live in this life, you do not and
    only make the silly talk, and we think to like rezinate and this
    Mary that these ones have made to do the roll over, and
    now may be it is you would say I am the big woman to hide
    behind Mary and rezinate to speak their words to. such
    the silly one you are Isobel and the better for you to may be
    not to talk but to listen the little.

    • I’m sorry I’ll look at your previous posts I haven’t really got time to keep up with the forum and I am primarily responding to rezinate who keeps posting to me.

      Truthfully, no I am making points to rezinate and because he can’t answer them he keeps trying to divert on to a different topic.

  19. I’m wrong you haven’t deleted it – forgot it was under Nov not Oct. It looks as if you didn’t post all my responses though will check back later when I have more time.

    • Isobel -confusion reigns supreme for you doesn’t it? First you admit
      that a prior claim of deletion you made was bogus and then finding the
      taste of such an admission sour you go off on another tangent.
      I suppose when you’ve got nothing else that’s the best you can do.
      Nothing has ever been deleted in any blog at any time during it’s
      existence.
      Some of the more asinine and over the top comments that resort to
      a lot name calling or profanity have failed to be approved, which
      is certainly my prerogative and will remain so, but once approved
      never deleted.
      You seem to forget a great deal-mostly those thing related to facts
      and the truth- an inherent risk when engaging in the AIM New Speak.

      • I didn’t see this because I looked under October. As far as I can see you have omitted 2 comments but the way the responses line up I sometimes miss things, don’t have that much time. I posted links to 2 articles and I don’t see them.

        No, I don’t forget things. If I get confused trying to respond on a blog which is distressing due its content then I’m not apologizing for that.

        You haven’t posted a couple of my responses which were neither asinine nor over the top, but by not posting them you’ve left your somewhat ridiculous responses looking unanswered. Those comments I made were definitely awaiting moderation and aren’t showing here.

      • Isobel-apparently you forget a lot of things-like AIM and it’s leaderships sordid
        history-you forget that there are people still suffering and attempting to recover
        from traumatic experiences at their hands.
        You forget the squalor and poverty too many of our people live in while your heroes
        lived and live as one percenters among them.
        You forget the outright lies your boy Russell and they told-you forget the murders,
        rapes, and fire bombings under their leadership. You forget the climate and breeding
        ground it has created for the growing prevalence of gangs and all manner of crime.
        You forget the $35,000 that rightfully belonged to the people that Russell and
        Weitzel absconded with.
        You forget that not so much as an apology has been offered by them to the people
        of WK who had their village ransacked and looted.
        I could go on and on but will say inspite of these things you have the audacity
        to come here, twist whatever you like, and speak about libel and derogatory statements.
        The age of empire is over for Britain-they no longer rule the waves or subjugate this
        country or it’s indigenous people-maybe difficult for you to accept, but nonetheless
        true.
        In light of that you can’t foist your ideas, interpretations, or standards off on us.
        Now, whatever priceless gems you think are missing try posting them again- and yes
        Isobel-the majority of your comments have been asinine.

  20. rezinate
    on November 6, 2012 at 4:08 pm said:
    And you want to talk about twisting words Isobel-exactly what “accusations” have I made
    about witnesses? But I’ll say what I have always said- if AIM doesn’t like what I say
    and believes they can prove it is wrong then they need to bring it-let’s go to court
    and we’ll get into everything from ’68 to the present. We’ll get into financial records,
    WK2 and those graves, Annie, every bit of it.

    Isobel
    on November 7, 2012 at 4:07 pm said:
    ‘Where are the 18 witnesses you ask? where are the multitude of
    witnesses who knew what went on within WK2-and I don’t mean the
    ones that were murdered and hidden in unmarked graves-but others
    within that estimated two or three hundred who were there?’

    Rezinate post to Silent Bear yesterday. Re your commment:
    ‘And you want to talk about twisting words Isobel-exactly what “accusations” have I made
    about witnesses? But I’ll say what I have always said- if AIM doesn’t like what I say’

    rezinate
    on November 7, 2012 at 4:35 pm said:
    uh…if you’re trying to make a point could you expand on this a little?

    ———————
    Which is another reason it’s easy to get confused here, your constant twisting.

    The point being, that having made a derogatory reference to the 18 alleged witnesses, you then go on to pretend you haven’t. Then you go on to pretend that you don’t understand what is meant when your previous comment is pointed out.

    I am just intrigued to return to the Whoopi Goldberg thread and see how you have managed to twist in response to what I wrote earlier, which no doubt you have as you’ve been online.

    • Isobel-do you not understand puncuation and their various meanings? Are you incapable
      or just refusing to acknowledge that in quoting a question SB made in my response as
      a question itself that it was exactly that? Note I asked “where are the multitude
      of witnesses who knew what went on within WK2?” Is that a”derogatory” reference to
      the specific 18?
      Just as attempt to try and add some validity to the things you say I’ll add
      the following: In my opinion any who witness such a crime as LBW describes and
      fails to intervene, report, or participates in any manner are about as sorry an
      excuse for a human being as I can imagine.
      I have zero respect for such people, think they should be publicly exposed, and
      whenever possible held to account.
      Now do you feel better Isobel?
      And like I said-if any don’t like what I say and believe they can disprove it they
      can take it court.

      ?-this is a question mark, it means a question has been asked.
      ! this is an exclamation mark-usually added for emphasis or to denote surprise.
      . this is a period-it means a sentence has ended.
      ” ” these are quotation marks whose purpose is to cite something that has been
      said-to give attribution.
      , this a comma-it represents a pause

      There are other but I seldom use them so this explanation should suffice.
      What you need to be doing is spell checking as I misspell words often enough.
      Now get off the Merry go Round and focus-try to stay on point and maintain a
      degree of relevance.

  21. I would say, as would anyone with any perception, that because of the question where are the 18 witnesses, you were implying that witnesses did not come forward. Your reference to WK2 makes that clear. Of course that is all a matter of interpretation but why else would you write that.

    You are choosing to believe an unsubstantiated allegation, for which no charges were ever brought, no investigation took place, no trial and no conviction. But you have decided Russell Means is guilty of this alleged rape, and that the witnesses present as described by her did not come forward.

    The people on the Trail were preoccupied with the 20 point position paper and the issues behind it. You might like to read Vine Deloria’s book on the subject, which I assume you haven’t, but apart from that there are plenty of people who were on the Trail who can still talk about it.

    Don’t try to bully me, which is what you’re doing with your twisted words. Your vicious, you twist everything round and you fail to answer a single point, because you can’t.

    You have a near rabid hatred of Russell Means without having known him, and your only interest is to believe anything derogatory said about him. And your rudeness is wasted on me, it’s obvious what you are already.

    • Isobel -your denials are rabid and overt-I wouldn’t add perception
      as an asset to your resume if I were you.
      I’ve read Vine’s books forward and backwards-your “perception”
      of his message is as obviously flawed as your perception of reality.
      So you come here and in short order began the process of name calling
      when you had nothing else to offer and now speak about bullying.
      This has been little more than exercise in futility, as a such
      meaningless and a waste of time-some this “discussion” has come
      to end-save yourself the distress of further reply as they will
      neither be posted or responded to.

  22. And you’ve carefully avoided posting the obituary written about Russell by a man who knew him, which described the work he did privately and his genuine concerns.

    You also failed to post the link I gave to Clyde Bellecourt talking about him after his death.

    You’re not interested in reality.

    Mary quoted the AIM Grand Council statement and you’ve praised Mary on this topic. So it isn’t AIM that you dislike then, since Mary was effectively backing what the Bellecourts said at the time, but Russell specifically. You have nothing against AIM, despite what your write about the leadership generally.

    Are you perhaps a little confused.

    • I think the confusion is on your part Isobel-browse through
      the archives and you may find despite how much it pains
      you to do so it is obvious that I think AIM is not
      only morally bankrupt but it’s leadership as well.
      Russell even went so far as to say he was AIM-he also
      said Europe must die for our people to have a chance.
      Care to comment about that?
      Russell and Clyde were anything but friends-everybody
      knows that-they despised each other, but since they
      are all linked to AIM, to the brotherhood, when push comes
      to shove they are obliged to defend the other to staunch
      the flow of truth.
      If you actually lived over here and had any understanding
      you would know that-but I would suggest thinking about
      the Mafia-even in the death of a rival praise is forthcoming.
      So accept it or not, despite your crystal ball interpretation
      I do “DISLIKE” AIM.
      I’ve seen all the glowing obits-those that use the word
      controversial to cover a multitude of sins, and in doing
      such have no value or credibility. Would you like for me
      to link some that take the opposite approach?
      These are the realities you refuse to accept.
      As far as praise I praise anyone who speaks the truth.

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