6 comments on “THE NOWHERE MAN

  1. It’s interesting that Peltier who has portrayed himself as courageous warrior hero
    who fought hard during the encounter at Jumping Bull, a man whose people know
    all this according to him on the other hand would say he wasn’t shooting at anyone.
    If that’s true then what he was doing, putting on act for his cohorts ? He didn’t want to
    “shoot, hit, hurt anyone”?
    All the talk, all the boasting is as hollow as he is? Of course he can’t come out and
    admit the truth considering the situation he’s in…but then it really doesn’t matter
    as the lies he’s been caught in and the evidence speak to a truth neither he nor AIM can
    alter.
    Regardless of shallow arguments in the end it is the shooter that takes the life, others
    may be complicit and any who are need to dragged in and dealt with, but a trigger
    accommodates only one finger at a time, that of the killer, and the ultimate guilt is theirs.

  2. Reblogged this on Influenced to Death and commented:
    “The only thing missing so far is that Hill hasn’t labelled himself a chief, or given himself a Hollywood style name – but the day is still young and maybe his mentor Banks can cobble together an honoring/naming ceremony.

    Maybe Hill can become an altar boy to Banks “spiritual leader” ministry, maybe they can share the remnants of the sacrificial wine that is the blood of AIM victims as they change into yet another costume in the sacristy following a black mass.” ~Rezinate~

  3. That is very astute. Peltier has marketed himself as both innocent bystander and brave warrior at Jumping Bull. Which is it? (I think a lot of his followers should ask him to clear this blur.)

    • Peltier’s whole thing seems to be either living in or playing to
      the moment, completely devoid of the concept of consequences.
      He says what he thinks will resonate at the moment depending on
      circumstance – the result is he comes off looking like exactly
      what he is.
      If it weren’t for his handlers his entire innocence charade would
      have been toast decades ago.

  4. Mary: Followers who ask the tough, specific questions, are ‘former followers’ or ‘provocateurs.’

    Deluca: The WSP (formerly, the Witness Protection Program), had a crucial element and that was testimony and then secretion and protection. Especially in criminal cases, not just ‘information’ but testifying and putting cases before a jury. Admittedly I know little of Deluca beyond what’s been written here (and Mattiessen’s ruminations), but if he did go into the ‘program’ the quid-pro-quo would have been someone had to go to jail, like those culpable for the deaths at WKII, etc. It isn’t a free-pass, or get-out-of-jail free card; especially wounding a federal agent. That Deluca was with Peltier at Small Boy’s isn’t enough…even Peltier knew it was the ‘old man yellow bird.’

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