ANNA MAE AQUASH 4 OR DR. BROWN’S REASONS HE COULD NOT FIND THE CORRECT CAUSE OF DEATH A few notes before I begin. I braved the land mines at alt.native and once again left because I was very confused. I e-mailed Monica and asked her for a list of who is who and how they are involved in the Anna Mae case. It was most helpful.
If you are really interested in learning more about this case go to alt.native and read the comments to my saga and other posts. There are some really good comments. Aside from the obvious… Monica Charles. There is a man named Dave who has written a book about the murder but it has not been published for legal reasons…I’m a bit embarrassed that Dave is reading anything I write because he is also the author of several books, most notable is POW WOW HIGHWAY(I ordered a copy for 2.52 on Amazon. Which I will feel guilty about now!) which was turned into a movie. He has also written an epic poem CREATION’S MYTH ( I cannot find anywhere) which has been compared to PARADISE LOST by John Milton. More books I need to read!!!
Thank you thavanag for pointing out my obvious error J.Edgar not Herbert. And Monica you were exactly right I was pissed off and do know the difference. If you all knew how many times I went over my posts and still miss obvious mistakes…Scholar I do not pretend to be!
Flint Carr is Richard Two Elks who gave testimony in the trial against Arlo Looking Cloud for the murder of Anna Mae Aquash.
Here are links to comments from alt.native concerning Anna Mae Part 1 part 2 and part 3.
Now for Anna Mae’s continuing saga…
Dr. W.O. Brown,….the pathologist…was unrepentant (about his inability to find the bullet in Anna Mae’s head).
“A litle bullet isn’t hard to overlook,” he said. “It certainly isn’t the first time a bullet was overlooked.” And, Why all the interest in this case? It seems awfully routine, you know. So they found an Indian body-so a body was found.” And, “I suppose the Indians will never let that woman die. AIM’s trying to stir up all the trouble they can. It’s a matter of record that Indians use every little incident that they can to create a situation over. They distort facts and use it to their advantage to further their cause. But I’ve tried to remain neutral. . I don’t think I ‘m prejudiced.”
…he had missed it only because the hospital’s X-ray machine had been broken. But he soon reversed course:
The machine was fine.
…he had merely chosen not to use it because X-rays were “too time- consuming,” “too awkward,” and “at times unsuccessful.” And anyway, since “it’s fairly common for Indians like these to die of an overdose,”…
(…Aquash’s blood was free of drugs or alcohol.)
…he had cut short his exam because the body was”stinky” and decomposed”
But from his verdict he did not swerve. It was the frost that had taken Anna Mae Aquash, not the bullet. The bullet, he said, may have pierced the brain casing, but not the brain proper. If it had entered the casing, it might have started a chain of events that incapacitated Aquash and left her at the mercy of the cold, but the shot did not kill her.
So basically this guy missed….
the stained sheet under her head…
her gunpowdered and bloodied hair…
the hole through several layers of bone….
(including the brain, through which the bullet had in fact passed and which Brown had removed and examined before dumping it in Aquash’s chest with the other dissected organs). I don’t get this part is Hendricks saying that Brown did find the bullet or is Brown claiming that he did see it but was lying???
And finally the bullet itself.
Among other “errors” in the autopsy, he claimed to have dissected and measured Aquash’s stomach, one of her kidneys, and her adrenal glands, but Dr. Peterson found all of these organs were attached, unopened, and with the metrics quite different from Brown’s.
….Dr Brown reported that Aquash had not been raped and had been dead no more than 10 days, Peterson concluded that rape could not be ruled out and Aquash could hav been killed weeks, even months, before she was found.
To be continued with SPECIAL AGENT ZIGROSSI CONFUSED AGAIN!
> ANNA MAE AQUASH 4 OR DR. BROWN’S REASONS HE COULD NOT FIND THE CORRECT > CAUSE OF DEATH > A few notes before I begin. I braved the land mines at alt.native and > once again left because I was very confused. I e-mailed Monica and > asked her for a list of who is who and how they are involved in the > Anna Mae case. It was most helpful.
> If you are really interested in learning more about this case go to > alt.native and read the comments to my saga and other posts.
Gosh, Elizabeth.
I (and *possibly* other posters at alt.native) would like to gushingly thank you for the notoriety. It's always interesting to see how one's cyber-hometown is being respected out there in the big world-wide-web, especially by those who have not yet graced us with their presence, nor actually interacted with any of our residents (unless you are perhaps counting the 'one' who does not mind pooping in her own back yard). Truly, as you have driven through, i hope you have taken appropriate 'snapshots' of our colorful peoples to post on your blog.
It is written (somewhere or other)... that all things happen for a reason. Well, you see, we are in the process of rebuilding alt.native. Our population has been dwindling to near-extinction levels. Some of us might be looking for the few, the brave, the proud - (and as i see it, people who can stand up to Monica Charles). Some of us might also be waiting for a return of the Old Ones. It is also written (you can google it)... that bad press is good press. Whatever that means. I'm all for looking on the bright side. :)
> There are > some really good comments. Aside from the obvious… Monica Charles. > There is a man named Dave who has written a book about the murder but > it has not been published for legal reasons…
Um, yoo-hoo. I noticed you did not mention my name among your posters of "good comments". But... perhaps i am being too sensitive. Why on earth would you have any reason to be biased? Hmmmmm......
> I’m a bit embarrassed that > Dave is reading anything I write because he is also the author of > several books, most notable is POW WOW HIGHWAY(I ordered a copy for > 2.52 on Amazon. Which I will feel guilty about now!) which was turned > into a movie. He has also written an epic poem CREATION’S MYTH ( I > cannot find anywhere) which has been compared to PARADISE LOST by John > Milton. More books I need to read!!!
A *Big Slurpy Award* goes out to YOU, Elizabeth! Maybe you'll get an autograph!
> Thank you thavanag for pointing out my obvious error J.Edgar not > Herbert. And Monica you were exactly right I was pissed off and do > know the difference. If you all knew how many times I went over my > posts and still miss obvious mistakes…Scholar I do not pretend to be!
Whew! One less pretense to worry about.
> Flint Carr is Richard Two Elks who gave testimony in the trial against > Arlo Looking Cloud for the murder of Anna Mae Aquash.
> Here are links to comments from alt.native concerning Anna Mae Part 1 > part 2 and part 3.
> Now for Anna Mae’s continuing saga…
Great that your posting chapter excerpts from one book. Also wonderful that you are being well-advised on which books to read. Yes, your impartial reporting is simply amazing! Do drop in during your next drive-thru.
On Mar 7, 9:42 am, oldwifetale <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[...]
> Some of us might also > be waiting for a return of the Old Ones.
I read that there is a prophecy that in the last days of this age many of the Old Ones will return, in bodies of all colors, to aid in the healing and transition by breaking down some of the barriers. I think that is true. I've met people who just seemed to be born knowing things they should have no way of knowing in the group they were born to. But I'm pretty sure some people would be highly offended at the idea of certain colors of skin being included in this. There are folks who will continue to chant their "They have no right! They are not worthy!" mantra, even to Spirit.
[...]
> Great that your posting chapter excerpts from one book. Also wonderful > that you are being well-advised on which books to read. Yes, your > impartial reporting is simply amazing! Do drop in during your next > drive-thru.
Come on, Donna! At least it's progress. I was told not to even comment about this subject because I'm White and can't understand it, and if I did comment it would be considered hijacking the thread. And actually, I agree it's best I not say anything about it, because I think it's too complex for me to sort through 30 yrs after the fact. I have no personal experience of it, and I don't know anyone who has. I think the people involved have too high a personal stake in it to tell the unbiased truth. And people's lives are at stake. This really is a life and death issue. I think it would be pretty arrogant of me to think I could step in and make sense of it all when the people involved don't seem to be able to do that. And they've been trying for a lot longer than I could give it.
But at least an exception has been made and a WHITE person has not only been allowed to comment, but actively encouraged (at least by some) to do so! That's real social progress, isn't it? We should feel good that one of "us" has made it, shouldn't we? We have a "token White" in the circle now. And as long as she keeps her place and doesn't try to worship with her sponsors or marry one of their kids, everything should be fine. ;-) She doesn't need people accusing her of being an Indian butt kisser or whatever the appropriate version of "Uncle Tom" would be in this case. We should wish her all the best.
Of course, I suppose continued support and encouragement and sponsorship might be contingent upon what she says and how she says it. Hopefully there will be a little more integrity involved than that. Maybe integration will work better in this direction and skin color really will cease to be judged in time. If an exception can be made once, and this person can be seen as an individual rather than a race, then maybe we will start to hear less and less "Stay out of ____! You're WHITE!" Maybe certain people will stop worrying about how they can keep "the others" OUT and start thinking about places for everyone IN the circle of life.
> > ANNA MAE AQUASH 4 OR DR. BROWN’S REASONS HE COULD NOT FIND THE CORRECT > > CAUSE OF DEATH > > A few notes before I begin. I braved the land mines at alt.native and > > once again left because I was very confused. I e-mailed Monica and > > asked her for a list of who is who and how they are involved in the > > Anna Mae case. It was most helpful.
> > If you are really interested in learning more about this case go to > > alt.native and read the comments to my saga and other posts.
> Gosh, Elizabeth.
> I (and *possibly* other posters at alt.native) would like to gushingly > thank you for the notoriety. It's always interesting to see how one's > cyber-hometown is being respected out there in the big world-wide-web, > especially by those who have not yet graced us with their presence, > nor actually interacted with any of our residents (unless you are > perhaps counting the 'one' who does not mind pooping in her own back > yard). Truly, as you have driven through, i hope you have taken > appropriate 'snapshots' of our colorful peoples to post on your > blog.
> It is written (somewhere or other)... that all things happen for a > reason. Well, you see, we are in the process of rebuilding alt.native. > Our population has been dwindling to near-extinction levels. Some of > us might be looking for the few, the brave, the proud - (and as i see > it, people who can stand up to Monica Charles). Some of us might also > be waiting for a return of the Old Ones. It is also written (you can > google it)... that bad press is good press. Whatever that means. I'm > all for looking on the bright side. :)
> > There are > > some really good comments. Aside from the obvious… Monica Charles. > > There is a man named Dave who has written a book about the murder but > > it has not been published for legal reasons…
> Um, yoo-hoo. I noticed you did not mention my name among your posters > of "good comments". But... perhaps i am being too sensitive. Why on > earth would you have any reason to be biased? Hmmmmm......
> > I’m a bit embarrassed that > > Dave is reading anything I write because he is also the author of > > several books, most notable is POW WOW HIGHWAY(I ordered a copy for > > 2.52 on Amazon. Which I will feel guilty about now!) which was turned > > into a movie. He has also written an epic poem CREATION’S MYTH ( I > > cannot find anywhere) which has been compared to PARADISE LOST by John > > Milton. More books I need to read!!!
> A *Big Slurpy Award* goes out to YOU, Elizabeth! > Maybe you'll get an autograph!
> > Thank you thavanag for pointing out my obvious error J.Edgar not > > Herbert. And Monica you were exactly right I was pissed off and do > > know the difference. If you all knew how many times I went over my > > posts and still miss obvious mistakes…Scholar I do not pretend to be!
> Whew! One less pretense to worry about.
> > Flint Carr is Richard Two Elks who gave testimony in the trial against > > Arlo Looking Cloud for the murder of Anna Mae Aquash.
> > Here are links to comments from alt.native concerning Anna Mae Part 1 > > part 2 and part 3.
> > Now for Anna Mae’s continuing saga…
> Great that your posting chapter excerpts from one book. Also wonderful > that you are being well-advised on which books to read. Yes, your > impartial reporting is simply amazing! Do drop in during your next > drive-thru.
Donna! Do be more gracious. You're embarrassing alt.native. More so because you are not NATIVE. Lizzy is white and her blog reaches a broad audience. I think that is what frightens the fbi. They want to keep the Anna Mae issue quiet as usual. Now it's leaking out. Oops! James Simon, your fbi compadre, should not have gone to her blog to bully her. It made her mad. Now she's posting every day about Anna Mae. Lizzy is reaching people that neither David nor I could have. It was synchronicity too. She innocently posted a link to Wikipedias article on Anna Mae on her blog after listening to a song about her. Notice of that came into my mail box on my Anna Mae alert. I told her to do more reading because Demain sits on the wikipedia site and removes or rewrites anything positive about Arlo, John and Dick. Peter Webster contacted her and gave her a reading list. Of course I am thrilled because this is true synchronicity. It was supposed to happen. Spirits are in control. Not the contrived synchronicity of the fbi. Like when they arrested Arlo. It wasn't the date they announced. They announced that Arlo had been arrested on Anna Mae's birthday. Then big bad cops Abe Alonzo and Bob Eccoffey cried. How sweet. I couldn't influence Lizzy if I wanted to. She has a strong mind of her own. Just ask James Simon.
On Mar 7, 2:44 pm, oldwifetale <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Mar 7, 12:10 pm, Monica <yano...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Donna! Do be more gracious. You're embarrassing alt.native.
> > > By being critical of a WHITE person? Now that's ironic. *LOL*
> > Isn't it!
> Sorry, Monica, but i'm not basing my 'criticism' on race; i'm basing > it on 'content'. :)
Well I just have a headache, probably from it spinning all the way around. ;-) Monica recently wrote on her blog about White women "taking over" alt.native and that it was in its death throes solely because of that fact...and here she is defending a White woman's appearance in (and opinion of) alt.native and telling another White woman that she should be polite and gracious to a White woman popping in to alt.native. *LOL* We are all capable of change, it seems.
Happily, I have yet to see anyone call Lizzie names or insult her ancestors, relatives, or personal life, in spite of her race. So maybe it is not always *race* that is truly the problem for some people, but rather people's conflicting opinions about political or social issues, ya think? Maybe it's just easier to blame it on race. And maybe that will change.
Alt.native does not appear to be dead, even with extra White people showing up. In fact, it seems to be blossoming. People are discussing all kinds of things. I used to read this one group occasionally, but 9 of every 10 posts are between two guys who hate one another and a couple of their followers. It's nothing but mud slinging and mutual accusations. Maybe someone will try to introduce an actual topic every three or four months, but it fizzles out. Everybody else has pretty much quit trying and gone elsewhere. I would hate to see it ever get to that point here.
But I don't think it will. Things seem to be looking up at least a little bit all around! Never mind the headache, it does my *heart* good. :-)
> On Mar 7, 2:44 pm, oldwifetale <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mar 7, 12:10 pm, Monica <yano...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Donna! Do be more gracious. You're embarrassing alt.native.
> > > > By being critical of a WHITE person? Now that's ironic. *LOL*
> > > Isn't it!
> > Sorry, Monica, but i'm not basing my 'criticism' on race; i'm basing > > it on 'content'. :)
> Well I just have a headache, probably from it spinning all the way > around. ;-) Monica recently wrote on her blog about White women > "taking over" alt.native and that it was in its death throes solely > because of that fact...and here she is defending a White woman's > appearance in (and opinion of) alt.native and telling another White > woman that she should be polite and gracious to a White woman popping > in to alt.native. *LOL* We are all capable of change, it seems.
> Happily, I have yet to see anyone call Lizzie names or insult her > ancestors, relatives, or personal life, in spite of her race. So > maybe it is not always *race* that is truly the problem for some > people, but rather people's conflicting opinions about political or > social issues, ya think? Maybe it's just easier to blame it on race. > And maybe that will change.
> Alt.native does not appear to be dead, even with extra White people > showing up. In fact, it seems to be blossoming. People are > discussing all kinds of things. I used to read this one group > occasionally, but 9 of every 10 posts are between two guys who hate > one another and a couple of their followers. It's nothing but mud > slinging and mutual accusations. Maybe someone will try to introduce > an actual topic every three or four months, but it fizzles out. > Everybody else has pretty much quit trying and gone elsewhere. I > would hate to see it ever get to that point here.
> But I don't think it will. Things seem to be looking up at least a > little bit all around! Never mind the headache, it does my *heart* > good. :-)
Okay the question is, Are you whites willing to allow change? From your post I would say that you will not.
Why don't you go over to pudgy Indian and talk with him about racism? You'll get another viewpoint that you wouldn't get here. His blog is very popular around the world.
On Mar 7, 4:35 pm, Monica <yano...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Things seem to be looking up at least a > > little bit all around! Never mind the headache, it does my *heart* > > good. :-)
> Okay the question is, Are you whites willing to allow change? From > your post I would say that you will not.
Which post? The last one, or an earlier one? If someone is going to make a judgment about my state of mind, don't forget all the ones I have posted recently--many of them agreeing with you and other posters about different topics that have been presented. Put them all on the scale or put none of them there. But not just certain ones somebody picks out.
You and I have had some very civil conversations lately, so I would say we have both changed. I have enjoyed them and learned a lot. I for one really hope that continues. If a condition of our conversations remaining civil is that neither of us can express any opinion that the other disagrees with, without it being made about race, then it won't work. And I would truly be sorry about that. I will express my opinions, as you will express yours, and that's as it should be. No two people are always going to agree, and certainly you and I won't. But I *will not* go back down into the swamp of name calling and personal insults. I don't like the things that live in there. And I don't like myself when I visit.
> Why don't you go over to pudgy Indian and talk with him about racism? > You'll get another viewpoint that you wouldn't get here. His blog is > very popular around the world.
I responded to his post here. I am not interested in *fighting* about racism and bragging about who I "beat down" or "demolished." Nor am I interested in trying to have a *discussion* with someone who pre- judges my position by my color before I have a chance to say a word. I don't think it's a good rule to judge whether someone has a right to speak or is trying to "dominate" based on whether or not they agree with a certain person.
I'm sure I would get a different viewpoint there, and that his blog is popular, and I'm sure there is a good reason for that. Perhaps, when I am feeling especially grounded and able to accept things for what they are rather than just react to them, I will go visit and do more reading. It would not be fair of *me* to go if I am going to pre- judge and look for things not to like either.
On the other hand, I have had people tell me the same thing about some of the White Power sites and say I should give them a look--you know, "support my race" and all that. I declined. I am not interested in promoting racism from *any* side of its ugly, hulking, black hole blob of an existence. I will not help keep it alive by feeding it another ego-driven pissing contest from either side of the fence. Sooner or later one of those fences is going to be electrified.
If a *discussion* can be about the *issues,* great, I'm all for that. A LOT of work needs to be done to get the playing field within a million miles of level. There are centuries of wrongs that need to be righted. But if it's going to become about personal stuff and venting misplaced rage and who can insult the other person the most times in a futile attempt to "prove" which person is the biggest racist, I'm outta there. That's been done to death for centuries. Look where it has gotten us. None of us *have* to interact with people who cannot treat us with common courtesy and respect as fellow human beings. NONE of us.
People are going to judge me however they want, whether they choose to do it based on my skin color, my gender, my age, my opinions, my character, or whatever else they choose. It would be a waste of my energy trying to *force* them to change their minds. I will be true to myself and my path, and they can make of that what they will. They will either see me as I am, or they will see me as they want to see me, or they will refuse to see me at all. I can't control that. I *can* control whether or not I say and do what I believe in my heart to be right, and that's what I will be held accountable for when all is said and done--no matter what anyone else thinks, says, or does about it. That's my truth.
On a lighter note, I hope you're having a wonderful weekend! It is like spring here, except the wind is blowing so hard I had to take all my bird feeders down and pick up all the stuff that has blown up from the road. It wouldn't surprise me if we get a thunderstorm. I love them though. My mom thinks I'm crazy. And I know she isn't the only one, right? ;-p
I'm so amused that Monica rages that "white people" AKA "maggots" can't express opinions, can't speak about these issues.
But she doesn't mind using her white sock puppet (irony that the name is Tool) to gather fawning adulation for herself and try to insult others here and smear the entire group.
You know, that's just plain crazy. Again.
But, it's nice to know that Monica has brought us a newly-hatched white expert to 'splain it all. Of course, said sock puppet doesn't have the guts to show up herself. It's a nice little act, isn't it?
No, Hope, this isn't about "progress." This is about a sock puppet and an act, with continued malice. And, as far as I know, Tool hasn't yet shown up on her own, so someone egging her on, giving her the words, and then copying her rechewed stuff to repost here doesn't say anything at all about real communication and relations between people.
As for you being told not to speak about this issue or others--that was just one person's opinion. Not a realistic expression of NDN country.
If you accept that someone has to give people permission to speak, and that someone's announcement of said rules is the basis of a perception about talking with native peoples, then that's a mighty shaky base. It's just a con job, trying to redirect energies to focus again on one person and her desire to hold the one ring, one ring to bind them, one ring to rule them all, and be Queen of Mordor.
> Alt.native does not appear to be dead, even with extra White people > showing up. In fact, it seems to be blossoming. People are > discussing all kinds of things.
Yes, there are several who are working to "reblossom" alt.native. And we're not counting the number of white, red, yellow, brown, black, taipoca, taupe, maroon, mauve, or seashell pink skins, either.
Doing so is not the history and tradition of the real alt.native, which has been almost destroyed. But whaddya know? Blossoms again.
> > Alt.native does not appear to be dead, even with extra White people > > showing up. In fact, it seems to be blossoming. People are > > discussing all kinds of things.
> Yes, there are several who are working to "reblossom" alt.native. And > we're not counting the number of white, red, yellow, brown, black, > taipoca, taupe, maroon, mauve, or seashell pink skins, either.
> Doing so is not the history and tradition of the real alt.native, > which has been almost destroyed. But whaddya know? Blossoms again.
Well, okay, I have to confess, I was being just a tiny bit sarcastic. I know it's a shock. Mea culpa. ;-p
> As for you being told not to speak about this issue or others--that > was just one person's opinion. Not a realistic expression of NDN > country.
That's good to be reminded of from time to time. I really do want to be respectful and not be one of "those" people who just waltz in and expect everyone to adjust to their preferred way of doing things. And I do see the arrogance of the way that often happens in real life, when a mixture of people get together to try to accomplish something. Oftentimes it *is* a White person who jumps in and "takes control," while representatives of other groups tend to hang back and not be forward. The article MT recommended about that has changed the way I look at many situations. I am an old dog, but I can still learn a new trick or two.
And I don't mind it at all when someone respectfully points things out that I might be doing without realizing it and educates me as to a more acceptable way. I have found that not only students, but human beings in general, are able to listen much more carefully and and take ownership of their actions and accept correction if they do not feel attacked. When that happens, their energy immediately goes toward trying to defend themselves and save face and think of ways to reject the wound of being called stupid/selfish/lazy/whatever, and they really can't focus on what it is *they* might need to change to make the situation better.
> If you accept that someone has to give people permission to speak, and > that someone's announcement of said rules is the basis of a perception > about talking with native peoples, then that's a mighty shaky base.
I agree. It gets to be a balancing act sometimes, trying to decide whether you feel strongly enough about something to say it, when you know with a good degree of certainty it's going to provoke a hostile reaction. And then you have to decide if that might end up serving a good end by getting people talking, or whether it's just going to be a waste-of-time flame war. I don't think anyone can give any other posters here permission to speak. But I do think there are things it is best I don't speak about, except perhaps to ask questions. I do need to get past that "teacher mindset" of always being the one talking more than listening. ;-)
> It's just a con job, trying to redirect energies to focus again on one > person and her desire to hold the one ring, one ring to bind them, one > ring to rule them all, and be Queen of Mordor.
*LOL* They can keep the ring. I just want to be an Elf.
> > Alt.native does not appear to be dead, even with extra White people > > showing up. In fact, it seems to be blossoming. People are > > discussing all kinds of things.
> Yes, there are several who are working to "reblossom" alt.native. And > we're not counting the number of white, red, yellow, brown, black, > taipoca, taupe, maroon, mauve, or seashell pink skins, either.
Well, some do...and that's fine too, as long as they tend their own garden. ;-) Tapioca skinned...that's a new and creative one! Unfortunately I'm picturing thighs with bad cellulite. *LOL*
> Doing so is not the history and tradition of the real alt.native, > which has been almost destroyed. But whaddya know? Blossoms again.
"Just remember in the winter/ Underneath the bitter snows/ Lies the seed that with the sun's love/ In the spring, becomes the rose." Sorry, I couldn't resist. And now at least one or two people are going to have that song stuck in their heads for awhile. Hehehe...
> Thanks for noticing and chiming in!
> LL
I am enjoying it immensely! The energy here is feeling much better lately.
> On Mar 7, 9:42 am, oldwifetale <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > Some of us might also > > be waiting for a return of the Old Ones.
> I read that there is a prophecy that in the last days of this age many > of the Old Ones will return, in bodies of all colors, to aid in the > healing and transition by breaking down some of the barriers. I think > that is true. I've met people who just seemed to be born knowing > things they should have no way of knowing in the group they were born > to. But I'm pretty sure some people would be highly offended at the > idea of certain colors of skin being included in this. There are > folks who will continue to chant their "They have no right! They are > not worthy!" mantra, even to Spirit.
> [...]
> > Great that your posting chapter excerpts from one book. Also wonderful > > that you are being well-advised on which books to read. Yes, your > > impartial reporting is simply amazing! Do drop in during your next > > drive-thru.
> Come on, Donna! At least it's progress. I was told not to even > comment about this subject because I'm White and can't understand it, > and if I did comment it would be considered hijacking the thread. And > actually, I agree it's best I not say anything about it, because I > think it's too complex for me to sort through 30 yrs after the fact. I > have no personal experience of it, and I don't know anyone who has. I > think the people involved have too high a personal stake in it to tell > the unbiased truth. And people's lives are at stake. This really is > a life and death issue. I think it would be pretty arrogant of me to > think I could step in and make sense of it all when the people > involved don't seem to be able to do that. And they've been trying for > a lot longer than I could give it.
I respectfully disagree, Hope (and i do respect you, so that's not just a 'word' to throw out there). That is very much like the position i took for many years here on alt.native in regard to this case and these trials, and all the people involved. I wasn't there, it was too complicated, too much time had passed, etc. - so i stayed out of it. But eventually my silence became 'disturbing' to one particular person here who not only 'invited' me to research and comment, but literally *harrassed* me about it to no end. The odd thing was that the more i looked, the more i realized that only one 'side' was being presented here by my 'harrasser' and her cohorts.
It is not only John Graham's and Arlo Looking Cloud's lives involved, nor 'their' families... but many other people's lives too, including the lives of Anna Mae's daughters, and the people who have been courageous enough to speak out and/or testify against either the FBI or AIM or *both*. What happened at Wounded Knee 1973 and to Anna Mae is something every 'american' of any color or origin should know about. It isn't Indian history *only* - it is American history involving all of us who have ever lived here. It has become as important to me as it is to just about anyone directly involved that the 'whole' truth be shown, not just a one-sided version concocted by *some* (not all, by a long stretch) old AIM members to create a massive FBI conspiracy in order to divert attention away from themselves. I have seen posters attacked here on alt.native when, upon deeper inspection, there was no good justification for it. So, no, i do not think being 'white' has anything to do with being able and willing and 'free' to comment. I don't think that by Monica promoting Elizabeth (or vice versa) she is making 'progress'. If whiteness is an issue here, it is because Elizabeth was *used* (albeit willingly) as a token white person to do the dirty work of Monica Charles, David Seals and others who have taken an obvious (and premature, imo) *side* in order to build a 'legal' case - which ultimately benefits themselves more than anyone else, and has actually done harm to others.
Take the 'perjury' accusation against Richard Two Elk, for instance. Upon really 'thinking' about it, that accusation is as fluffy as cotton candy. You can't take opinions that someone stated 9 years ago, put it up against testimony that was given on the stand 4 years later and then compare opinions that have developed up to this point with new information, and say someone was 'lying' or commiting perjury. There was no apparent 'lie', only an evolution of theory and opinion, and the adding of more parts to the story. Most of these accusations are not about what Richard Two Elk said that was later contradicted, but about what Richard claimed that *Arlo* said but later recanted.
Or take this multiple-excerpt blogging by Elizabeth about the bullet and the doctors. Why did she not post any response from the site that Anna Mae's daughters have contributed to, in regard to the bullet and the medical examiners? Many of these points are addressed in "The Lies of John Graham". She gave a few 'links', but apparently didn't feel it was worth 'quoting'. Again - this is a biased view based on the opinions of Monica Charles, who claims to have been at Wounded Knee, but won't give personal accounts of her time there.
And so on, and so forth. Yes, we *all* have a right (and maybe even an obligation) to look into this history and also to comment on it, imo.
> But at least an exception has been made and a WHITE person has not > only been allowed to comment, but actively encouraged (at least by > some) to do so! That's real social progress, isn't it? We should > feel good that one of "us" has made it, shouldn't we? We have a > "token White" in the circle now. And as long as she keeps her place > and doesn't try to worship with her sponsors or marry one of their > kids, everything should be fine. ;-) She doesn't need people > accusing her of being an Indian butt kisser or whatever the > appropriate version of "Uncle Tom" would be in this case. We should > wish her all the best.
> Of course, I suppose continued support and encouragement and > sponsorship might be contingent upon what she says and how she says > it. Hopefully there will be a little more integrity involved than > that. Maybe integration will work better in this direction and skin > color really will cease to be judged in time. If an exception can be > made once, and this person can be seen as an individual rather than a > race, then maybe we will start to hear less and less "Stay out of > ____! You're WHITE!" Maybe certain people will stop worrying about > how they can keep "the others" OUT and start thinking about places for > everyone IN the circle of life.
> I respectfully disagree, Hope (and i do respect you, so that's not > just a 'word' to throw out there). That is very much like the position > i took for many years here on alt.native in regard to this case and > these trials, and all the people involved. I wasn't there, it was too > complicated, too much time had passed, etc. - so i stayed out of it. > But eventually my silence became 'disturbing' to one particular person > here who not only 'invited' me to research and comment, but literally > *harrassed* me about it to no end. The odd thing was that the more i > looked, the more i realized that only one 'side' was being presented > here by my 'harrasser' and her cohorts.
> It is not only John Graham's and Arlo Looking Cloud's lives involved, > nor 'their' families... but many other people's lives too, including > the lives of Anna Mae's daughters, and the people who have been > courageous enough to speak out and/or testify against either the FBI > or AIM or *both*. What happened at Wounded Knee 1973 and to Anna Mae > is something every 'american' of any color or origin should know > about. It isn't Indian history *only* - it is American history > involving all of us who have ever lived here. It has become as > important to me as it is to just about anyone directly involved that > the 'whole' truth be shown, not just a one-sided version concocted by > *some* (not all, by a long stretch) old AIM members to create a > massive FBI conspiracy in order to divert attention away from > themselves. I have seen posters attacked here on alt.native when, upon > deeper inspection, there was no good justification for it. So, no, i > do not think being 'white' has anything to do with being able and > willing and 'free' to comment. I don't think that by Monica promoting > Elizabeth (or vice versa) she is making 'progress'. If whiteness is an > issue here, it is because Elizabeth was *used* (albeit willingly) as a > token white person to do the dirty work of Monica Charles, David Seals > and others who have taken an obvious (and premature, imo) *side* in > order to build a 'legal' case - which ultimately benefits themselves > more than anyone else, and has actually done harm to others.
> Take the 'perjury' accusation against Richard Two Elk, for instance. > Upon really 'thinking' about it, that accusation is as fluffy as > cotton candy. You can't take opinions that someone stated 9 years ago, > put it up against testimony that was given on the stand 4 years later > and then compare opinions that have developed up to this point with > new information, and say someone was 'lying' or commiting perjury. > There was no apparent 'lie', only an evolution of theory and opinion, > and the adding of more parts to the story. Most of these accusations > are not about what Richard Two Elk said that was later contradicted, > but about what Richard claimed that *Arlo* said but later recanted.
> Or take this multiple-excerpt blogging by Elizabeth about the bullet > and the doctors. Why did she not post any response from the site that > Anna Mae's daughters have contributed to, in regard to the bullet and > the medical examiners? Many of these points are addressed in "The Lies > of John Graham". She gave a few 'links', but apparently didn't feel it > was worth 'quoting'. Again - this is a biased view based on the > opinions of Monica Charles, who claims to have been at Wounded Knee, > but won't give personal accounts of her time there.
> And so on, and so forth. Yes, we *all* have a right (and maybe even an > obligation) to look into this history and also to comment on it, imo.
> Donna
Points taken. And as I said to LL, I was being a bit sarcastic in my post about having an "approved White person" actually being encouraged to get involved in the case, when other Whites had been told to keep their noses out of it because it was none of their business. Obviously there are lots of Whites involved in the actual case, and African-Americans were involved too. It is not strictly an Indian issue.
I would not presume to tell anyone what they should be interested in or get involved in. You're right, this is a very important case. Not only is it life and death, but it *will* have a much broader impact, as you said. But I also know *my* limitations. I have to pick my battles, and this one is not for me. It *is* too complex...for *me*. It is too emotionally charged for me to be able to remain neutral and objective and follow just the facts. I can't immerse myself in it without taking on those emotions. And right now I can't afford to do that, since I am taking on so many real-life emotions with what's going on in my family. Being empathic can be a real blessing. It also sometimes sucks. *S*
I will keep reading about it, especially since both "sides" are being represented here. But I have to keep some distance. My ego wants to jump in and figure out where people are making mistakes (on either side) and "fix" this so people can stop fighting about it. But that is beyond my capabilities, and that's what I meant by keeping my arrogance in check. It's not something *I* have the skills to figure out or fix--especially in a short time. And I suspect that may be true of others as well.
You guys have been following this and studying it for a long time. You know a lot about the people involved. It's not the same thing, and I did not mean to insinuate that *no one* should be involved. I do think people--especially late comers--need to be careful about not making it a "cult of personality" issue. That happens to a lot of history. The story we end up getting is more about who wrote it and what "character" they identified with and what their personal agenda was than about the facts. There are just so many issues involved in this, and so many people have a stake in it that it's difficult to find a single thread and follow it through the big tangled ball to its end, let alone unravel the whole ball.
On Mar 8, 8:19 am, oldwifetale <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Again - this is a biased view based on the > opinions of Monica Charles, who claims to have been at Wounded Knee, > but won't give personal accounts of her time there.
i think this is unfair. there were many at wk2 that prefer not to talk about it. or regret it when they do. not that they are ashamed of it, hell, no! but because they just choose not to talk about it, for whatever personal reason, and therefore that should be respected.
> On Mar 8, 10:19 am, oldwifetale <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I respectfully disagree, Hope (and i do respect you, so that's not > > just a 'word' to throw out there). That is very much like the position > > i took for many years here on alt.native in regard to this case and > > these trials, and all the people involved. I wasn't there, it was too > > complicated, too much time had passed, etc. - so i stayed out of it. > > But eventually my silence became 'disturbing' to one particular person > > here who not only 'invited' me to research and comment, but literally > > *harrassed* me about it to no end. The odd thing was that the more i > > looked, the more i realized that only one 'side' was being presented > > here by my 'harrasser' and her cohorts.
> > It is not only John Graham's and Arlo Looking Cloud's lives involved, > > nor 'their' families... but many other people's lives too, including > > the lives of Anna Mae's daughters, and the people who have been > > courageous enough to speak out and/or testify against either the FBI > > or AIM or *both*. What happened at Wounded Knee 1973 and to Anna Mae > > is something every 'american' of any color or origin should know > > about. It isn't Indian history *only* - it is American history > > involving all of us who have ever lived here. It has become as > > important to me as it is to just about anyone directly involved that > > the 'whole' truth be shown, not just a one-sided version concocted by > > *some* (not all, by a long stretch) old AIM members to create a > > massive FBI conspiracy in order to divert attention away from > > themselves. I have seen posters attacked here on alt.native when, upon > > deeper inspection, there was no good justification for it. So, no, i > > do not think being 'white' has anything to do with being able and > > willing and 'free' to comment. I don't think that by Monica promoting > > Elizabeth (or vice versa) she is making 'progress'. If whiteness is an > > issue here, it is because Elizabeth was *used* (albeit willingly) as a > > token white person to do the dirty work of Monica Charles, David Seals > > and others who have taken an obvious (and premature, imo) *side* in > > order to build a 'legal' case - which ultimately benefits themselves > > more than anyone else, and has actually done harm to others.
> > Take the 'perjury' accusation against Richard Two Elk, for instance. > > Upon really 'thinking' about it, that accusation is as fluffy as > > cotton candy. You can't take opinions that someone stated 9 years ago, > > put it up against testimony that was given on the stand 4 years later > > and then compare opinions that have developed up to this point with > > new information, and say someone was 'lying' or commiting perjury. > > There was no apparent 'lie', only an evolution of theory and opinion, > > and the adding of more parts to the story. Most of these accusations > > are not about what Richard Two Elk said that was later contradicted, > > but about what Richard claimed that *Arlo* said but later recanted.
> > Or take this multiple-excerpt blogging by Elizabeth about the bullet > > and the doctors. Why did she not post any response from the site that > > Anna Mae's daughters have contributed to, in regard to the bullet and > > the medical examiners? Many of these points are addressed in "The Lies > > of John Graham". She gave a few 'links', but apparently didn't feel it > > was worth 'quoting'. Again - this is a biased view based on the > > opinions of Monica Charles, who claims to have been at Wounded Knee, > > but won't give personal accounts of her time there.
> > And so on, and so forth. Yes, we *all* have a right (and maybe even an > > obligation) to look into this history and also to comment on it, imo.
> > Donna
> Points taken. And as I said to LL, I was being a bit sarcastic in my > post about having an "approved White person" actually being encouraged > to get involved in the case, when other Whites had been told to keep > their noses out of it because it was none of their business. > Obviously there are lots of Whites involved in the actual case, and > African-Americans were involved too. It is not strictly an Indian > issue.
> I would not presume to tell anyone what they should be interested in > or get involved in. You're right, this is a very important case. Not > only is it life and death, but it *will* have a much broader impact, > as you said. But I also know *my* limitations. I have to pick my > battles, and this one is not for me. It *is* too complex...for *me*. > It is too emotionally charged for me to be able to remain neutral and > objective and follow just the facts. I can't immerse myself in it > without taking on those emotions. And right now I can't afford to do > that, since I am taking on so many real-life emotions with what's > going on in my family. Being empathic can be a real blessing. It > also sometimes sucks. *S*
> I will keep reading about it, especially since both "sides" are being > represented here. But I have to keep some distance. My ego wants to > jump in and figure out where people are making mistakes (on either > side) and "fix" this so people can stop fighting about it. But that > is beyond my capabilities, and that's what I meant by keeping my > arrogance in check. It's not something *I* have the skills to figure > out or fix--especially in a short time. And I suspect that may be > true of others as well.
> You guys have been following this and studying it for a long time. > You know a lot about the people involved. It's not the same thing, > and I did not mean to insinuate that *no one* should be involved. I > do think people--especially late comers--need to be careful about not > making it a "cult of personality" issue. That happens to a lot of > history. The story we end up getting is more about who wrote it and > what "character" they identified with and what their personal agenda > was than about the facts. There are just so many issues involved in > this, and so many people have a stake in it that it's difficult to > find a single thread and follow it through the big tangled ball to its > end, let alone unravel the whole ball.- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
I haven't told whites to stay out of the case. I have told lisa that she cannot speak about our religious beliefs. It is wrong for her to appropriate our spirituality and culture. She has no knowledge and no right and she enver will. We speak by right of blood. She doesn't have any.
The fbi is trying to cover up the murder once and for all by assigning blame to John Graham and Arlo Looking Cloud. They have no evidence, what they did have they "lost." This story is bigger than you can possibly imagine. It is stolen lands, it is about uranium mining on reservations, it is about war games played on Indians, it is about cointel.
Take a real good look at Richard Two Elk's interview before the fbi has it pulled. They built their case on the story he told. It was the story that the fbi WANTED told. They manipulated time, places and dates to fit their contrived story. The story they are telling is not true.
There is the fbi document that says they were watching girls that looked like Anna Mae. There are the differing descriptions of the girls at the crime scene and the two autopsies. Did they kill lookalike girls to cover her murder? The fbi must clear themselves of the fiasco of the different bodies. THOSE families need closure.
The feds wouldn't allow dna testing of the body. BOTH Arlo and John asked for it. Denise said Arlo wanted identity of the body that was in that grave. The court denied it. I have questions too if ANY of those bodies was her.
Demain and two elves have said that she was killed because she knew who actually killed those agents at Jumping Bull. It's entirely possible that the real shooter was an fbi plant. It is also very possible he is the one that killed Anna Mae.
Demain brought up the possibility that she was killed elsewhere and dumped at the crime scene. If that's true then the whole story of John and Arlo simply couldn't have happened. The fbi has many story lines going.
> On Mar 8, 8:19 am, oldwifetale <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Again - this is a biased view based on the > > opinions of Monica Charles, who claims to have been at Wounded Knee, > > but won't give personal accounts of her time there.
> i think this is unfair. > there were many at wk2 that prefer not to talk about it. > or regret it when they do. > not that they are ashamed of it, hell, no! > but because they just choose not to talk about it, for whatever > personal reason, and therefore that should be respected.
Yep, i totally agree with you - in principle - and it is like any war where those things aren't often talked about on either side from a personal level. It's nobody's business. But i don't feel that way in this instance. In most cases i think *any* personal experience should be respected, but *not* when you are using it to build some kind of case - or accusing 'other' people (who were also involved) of all kinds of things while one's own activities in the same place and time are never mentioned. Then it does become other people's business (especially those who are accused), and i think it's unfair to leave one's self out of the picture. It is basically saying, "I was there" - as some kind of 'proof' about any particular claim or accusation without saying what you saw or heard that actually proves something. If she thinks other people's lives and reputations are 'fair game' to be dragged through the mud, and they are demanded to 'expose' their private personal lives and experiences for all to see - even when they are not on trial - why not her?
> ANNA MAE AQUASH 4 OR DR. BROWN’S REASONS HE COULD NOT FIND THE CORRECT > CAUSE OF DEATH > A few notes before I begin. I braved the land mines at alt.native and > once again left because I was very confused. I e-mailed Monica and > asked her for a list of who is who and how they are involved in the > Anna Mae case. It was most helpful.
> If you are really interested in learning more about this case go to > alt.native and read the comments to my saga and other posts. There are > some really good comments. Aside from the obvious… Monica Charles. > There is a man named Dave who has written a book about the murder but > it has not been published for legal reasons…I’m a bit embarrassed that > Dave is reading anything I write because he is also the author of > several books, most notable is POW WOW HIGHWAY(I ordered a copy for > 2.52 on Amazon. Which I will feel guilty about now!) which was turned > into a movie. He has also written an epic poem CREATION’S MYTH ( I > cannot find anywhere) which has been compared to PARADISE LOST by John > Milton. More books I need to read!!!
THE CREATION MYTH is circulating privately among spiritual people, partly because it's about Ceremonies that can't be made public. One of which names the killers of Anna Mae Aquash, who, it turns out, was and is a very important Spirit.
> Thank you thavanag for pointing out my obvious error J.Edgar not > Herbert. And Monica you were exactly right I was pissed off and do > know the difference. If you all knew how many times I went over my > posts and still miss obvious mistakes…Scholar I do not pretend to be!
> Flint Carr is Richard Two Elks who gave testimony in the trial against > Arlo Looking Cloud for the murder of Anna Mae Aquash.
> Here are links to comments from alt.native concerning Anna Mae Part 1 > part 2 and part 3.
> Now for Anna Mae’s continuing saga…
> Dr. W.O. Brown,….the pathologist…was unrepentant (about his inability > to find the bullet in Anna Mae’s head).
> “A litle bullet isn’t hard to overlook,” he said. “It certainly isn’t > the first time a bullet was overlooked.” And, Why all the interest in > this case? It seems awfully routine, you know. So they found an Indian > body-so a body was found.” And, “I suppose the Indians will never let > that woman die. AIM’s trying to stir up all the trouble they can. It’s > a matter of record that Indians use every little incident that they > can to create a situation over. They distort facts and use it to their > advantage to further their cause. But I’ve tried to remain neutral. . > I don’t think I ‘m prejudiced.”
> …he had missed it only because the hospital’s X-ray machine had been > broken. But he soon reversed course:
> The machine was fine.
> …he had merely chosen not to use it because X-rays were “too time- > consuming,” “too awkward,” and “at times unsuccessful.” And anyway, > since “it’s fairly common for Indians like these to die of an > overdose,”…
> (…Aquash’s blood was free of drugs or alcohol.)
> …he had cut short his exam because the body was”stinky” and > decomposed”
> But from his verdict he did not swerve. It was the frost that had > taken Anna Mae Aquash, not the bullet. The bullet, he said, may have > pierced the brain casing, but not the brain proper. If it had entered > the casing, it might have started a chain of events that incapacitated > Aquash and left her at the mercy of the cold, but the shot did not > kill her.
> So basically this guy missed….
> the stained sheet under her head…
> her gunpowdered and bloodied hair…
> the hole through several layers of bone….
The first autopsy was not the body of Anna Mae, but another woman we know about, whose relatives came to the Pine Ridge hospital that night!
> (including the brain, through which the bullet had in fact passed and > which Brown had removed and examined before dumping it in Aquash’s > chest with the other dissected organs). I don’t get this part is > Hendricks saying that Brown did find the bullet or is Brown claiming > that he did see it but was lying???
> And finally the bullet itself.
> Among other “errors” in the autopsy, he claimed to have dissected and > measured Aquash’s stomach, one of her kidneys, and her adrenal glands, > but Dr. Peterson found all of these organs were attached, unopened, > and with the metrics quite different from Brown’s.
> ….Dr Brown reported that Aquash had not been raped and had been dead > no more than 10 days, Peterson concluded that rape could not be ruled > out and Aquash could hav been killed weeks, even months, before she > was found.
> To be continued with SPECIAL AGENT ZIGROSSI CONFUSED AGAIN!
