Thursday, February 19, 2009

PECHANGA SHAME: Without a Tribe's Second Anniversary

Yes, readers, Pechanga SHAME.

This week is the second anniversary of the KNBC NEWS piece WITHOUT A TRIBE. Originally airing in February 2007, this broadcast was one of the highest rated stories. It did so well that they repeated it in its entirety the next day.

In this piece, you can see Pechanga Tribal Spokesman Mark Macarro being caught in a LIE, in his first 16 seconds on air.

The story shows how the Pechanga Tribe hired noted anthropologist Dr. John Johnson to research the ancestry of Paulina Hunter. He proved she was Pechanga and MORE SO than any other family of the tribe. Yet, the Bobbi LeMere led, Frances Miranda-Ihrene Scearse backed enrollment committee did NOT use the report they paid for, instead, using hearsay from an imprisoned child molestor. Bobbie, Frances or Ihrene would not want that person babysitting their grandchildren, but they WOULD let him destroy the heritage of hundreds of the tribe.

Please watch WITHOUT A TRIBE at this link, and then ask yourselves who has a bigger incentive to LIE, Macarro or Dr. Johnson?

Here's what tribal disenrollments are being compare to.


Constitutional Cherokees said...

keep speaking out!

t'eetilawuncha! said...

Congratulation Cousin.

Your blog is very popular, with over 700 hits a day! Alot of hits comming from all over the country. Google searches are working, and your rankings are among the highest!

Anonymous said...

Yes, what is great about it on services like AOL and Internet Explorer this blog is near the top of the list when anyone searches for just the name Pechanga.

So people looking for information about the casino or the tribe are bound to be looking in on the goings on around here.

I am sure Corny, Witchey Poo, General Custer, and Mr. Potato Head are not too happy about that.

Anonymous said...

You all are LOSERS.

We won, you lost, get over it.

Anonymous said...

If we are all losers and you won and we lost, why do you bother to come here, read what we have to say, and then comment?

You are worried and if you are a Basquez or Masiel, you aren't even Pechanga and deep down you know it.

Why isn't your ancestor Francisca Leyvas on the census records at Pechanga until a few years after her birth?

Why was the woman you claim as being Francisca's mother married to a different man than her father, as recorded on the official Pechanga census record, at the time of her birth?

Why was her daughter Ruth Masiel, adopted by another Pechanga family in the 1920's if she was Pechanga?

Does Francisca even have a 1928 application on file?

Also, why did her brother, Maxie Leyvas, reportedly say he was San Luiseno (San Luis Rey) and not Pechanga on his 1928 application for enrollment as a California Indian?

That was one of the reasons the enrollment committee gave for kicking out the Hunters, because a member of their extended family put San Luis Rey on his 1928 application even though other Hunter family members put Pechanga on their 1928 applications?

So if a member of your extended family put San Luis Rey, shouldn't you be kicked out too.

You say you won but we know you are worried.

Anonymous said...

The last poster brought up some interesting questions.

I would like to add, if Ruth Masiel was adopted by a Pechanga family was it in the so called Indian way, a constitutional requirment?

Plus, I would ask this anonymous poster who calls us losers, why were the disenrollment cases of the Masiel/Basquez and Candalaria Flores (Francis Miranda) families taken out of order that they were filed and why were they allowed to be cleared by less than a legal quorum of the enrollment committee while the Manueal Miranda and Hunter families' cases had to be heard by a quorum.

Were their cases taken first so they could be illegally cleared so that they could vote the M. Mirandas and Hunters out of the tribe for filing counter disenrollment challenges on them?

Finally is the reason the CPP always pushed for membership being decided by Oral Tradition instead of documentation that some of them don't have the documentation to back up their claims of being original Pechanga people?

I doubt if this person who calls us losers has any clue about the facts of what has gone at Pechanga in the last few years so readers, who do you believe, us who post arguments to back up what we claim or those who come here to berate us and calls us names?

Anonymous tribal member, you actually help our cause by coming here.

So keep on coming back and show the public how some tribal members really are.

But if you really won, then just stay away as there would be no need to comment on anything we say.

Anonymous said...

Add on to my last post, the tribal council ruled in allowing the disenrollment cases to be taken out of the order filed that since there had never been mulitiple disenrollment cases, that the cases with the most information presented would be taken first.

Was the reason there was more information on the possible disenrollment of the CPP families than there was on the M. Miranda and Hunter families because there was more evidence that put those families in question?

Whatever the case was, by taking the cases our of the order that they were filed stacked the deck against the M. Mirandas and the Hunters and biased people with a personal stack in the outcome, from both the Masiel/Basquez and C Flores families, were reinstated to the enrollment committee and they were allowed to vote on the cases of people who had filed counter disenrollment challenges to the Masiel/Basquez and C Flores famlies.

Just one more violation of Article V of the Pechanga constitution and bylaws forbidding malice or predjudice against tribal members.

To tribal members: I know some of you are offended by us going public with things that should be internal but what else are we supposed to do as the system at Pechanga, as it was implemented, let us down and as I have said elsewhere, with just a few exceptions, no one from the tribe has done one thing to help us so we are helping ourselves.

Anonymous said...

Im an employee at Pechanga and man is it becoming a terrible place to work...they go such bad press about the lay-offs that they now went to a point system to make it easier to fire people...that way it wont show up as lay-off and still reduce the work force.If you get 9 points you are terminated.Even with good excuses, they still knock off points...everyone is miserable, but they know we need jobs, so they hang his firing threat over our heads.We are the people that are helping them make their millions a dollars per capita per month, yet they treat us like slaves.The sad thing is that we have no recourse, no unions, no one we can complain to...they just throw up their sovereign nation.."we can do what we want" crap..California needs to look in on their business practices and treatment of employess, not to mention the tons of smoke we have to breath each day if we want to keep our low paying jobs.

Luiseno said...

'aamokat said...To tribal members: I know some of you are offended by us going public with things that should be internal but what else are we supposed to do...

I see this forum and others like it not as a way to go public with private tribal matters, but as a way to converse with those still in the Tribe. We have been locked out of our Tribe, and there is no other way to inform, notify, share information with the Tribe as to what transpired. How can a matter remain internal, when we have been forced into an external situation ?

Anonymous said...

Added Fact to the cases taken out of order to clear questionable enrollment for enrollment members.

All Parties in question were rescued (fancy world for let go) from the enrollment committee by order of the Tribal Council until cleared. This action by the Tribal Council left three members on the enrollment committee. Leaving this question… Cleared by whom?

Instead of informing the general membership of these issues at hand the Council acted in the best interest of the CPP (Corrupt Pechanga People) a faction of tribal members. It is obvious to me that to bring justice to these issues without prejudice or malice the Council would have worked to rebuild the enrollment committee to a legal quorum; move through the complaints in the order filed and held the same standard to each individual.
The history that has been written is much different that how it should have been.