Greetings Readers! Hope you all had a wonderful Christmas and New Years. We've been away from the blog for a week and thoroughly enjoyed spending time with the family. New Year's 2011 brings us into the five year anniversary of the termination of Pechanga citizens who descended from Paulina Hunter. Sadly, it's a year more for those of Apis ancestry.
We've had a good 2010, forcing the Pechanga Tribe to show their dishonesty as to what they have done to their citizens. There has been a lot of visits from Congress, Department of Interior and even the office of the President has come to Original Pechanga's Blog for information.
For our resolution for 2011, we will work harder to bring what Pechanga has done to light. WE WON'T GO AWAY. The tribal hack who visits here has pushed that meme often. NO, we won't give up. We may have some people drop off, but we'll work to get them back and enlist other family members to do their share. And we will continue to focus on how other tribes have done the same to their people.
We will continue to focus on Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro, as well as the CPP's use of a felonious child molester. We will work to get more people to stay away from Pechanga and hope to get some schools to refuse to accept money from a tribe that practices apartheid. We will draw attention to tribal antics and see if we can get local news to cover it.
Please come and visit the blog often, join in our comments and let your friends know that their is corruption simmering below the surface.
Monday, January 3, 2011
NAACP Committed to Publicize Plight of Native Americans? Is It What It Seems?
According to informed sources, the NAACP adopted this resolution at their summer conference in Kansas City, Mo.
1. NAACP Support of Native American Indians
WHEREAS, the history of the Native American Indians is intertwined with that of African-Americans; and
WHEREAS, during slavery, the Native American Indian nations provided safe havens for run-away slaves; and
WHEREAS, the African-American and Native American Indian have faced the same or similar discrimination and bigotry in America; and
WHEREAS, Native American Indians have participated in, and fought alongside African-Americans during the civil rights movement for equality of all people; and
WHEREAS, the poverty rate and unemployment rate for Native American Indians are higher than that of any ethnic group in America; and
WHEREAS, the illiteracy rate for Native American Indians is higher than that of any ethnic group in America; and
WHEREAS, the majority of Americans are unaware of the extremely poor living conditions most Native American Indians live in.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the NAACP is committed to immediately help publicize the plight of Native Americans; and, that the NAACP further highlight this issue during its National Convention in Los Angeles in 2011, and at the 2011 Image Awards Ceremony.
At first blush, that sounds like tremendous news, a renowned civil rights organization coming to the aid of another group. Yet all is not as it seems. There should be some serious reflection by the NAACP as to what they are going to "publicize".
Let's look at a few Whereases:
Whereas, Slavery: And what about tribes like the Cherokee that OWNED slaves? The Cherokee dragged their slaves on the "Trail of Tears". They are currently mistreating their slaves descendents, hey NAACP, ever hear of the FREEDMEN? Shouldn't you call out the Five Civilized Tribes? And the Freedmen just got screwed in the Cobell Settlement.
Whereas, Civil Rights Struggle: Yet, after that struggle for equality, they have turned on their own people and violated some tribal members, and others civil rights including apartheid like tactics. Should each tribe that has done so be called out as a separate sovereign nation? Should the NAACP be accepting funds from tribes that have done so? We know the CA NAACP has taken money from Pechanga, which is well known to have violated their people's civil rights. And Alice Huffman KNEW about the rights violations.
Whereas, poor living conditions: That's because many of CA tribes have not fullfilled their promise to lift all Indians, and in fact are trying to keep many tribes from benefitting from gaming in CA.
Whereas, Poverty & Unemployment: Gaming tribes in CA have sent their own people into poverty and have terminated many from employment in tribal enterprises. The Pechanga Tribe alone has stolen $280,000,000 for terminated members, more if you include those who rightfully belong, who are kept out via a moratorium. The Redding Rancheria terminated 25% of their tribe and the Picayune Rancheria almost 50%, equal to 15 million Californians. Enough yet to give you pause, NAACP?
Is the NAACP doing it for the money? Or can they stand up for Native Americans who have been wrong by Native Americans.
NAACP you stood up for people AGAINST APARTHEID in South Africa, PLEASE, DO NOT STAND UP FOR people who practice apartheid in America.
1. NAACP Support of Native American Indians
WHEREAS, the history of the Native American Indians is intertwined with that of African-Americans; and
WHEREAS, during slavery, the Native American Indian nations provided safe havens for run-away slaves; and
WHEREAS, the African-American and Native American Indian have faced the same or similar discrimination and bigotry in America; and
WHEREAS, Native American Indians have participated in, and fought alongside African-Americans during the civil rights movement for equality of all people; and
WHEREAS, the poverty rate and unemployment rate for Native American Indians are higher than that of any ethnic group in America; and
WHEREAS, the illiteracy rate for Native American Indians is higher than that of any ethnic group in America; and
WHEREAS, the majority of Americans are unaware of the extremely poor living conditions most Native American Indians live in.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the NAACP is committed to immediately help publicize the plight of Native Americans; and, that the NAACP further highlight this issue during its National Convention in Los Angeles in 2011, and at the 2011 Image Awards Ceremony.
At first blush, that sounds like tremendous news, a renowned civil rights organization coming to the aid of another group. Yet all is not as it seems. There should be some serious reflection by the NAACP as to what they are going to "publicize".
Let's look at a few Whereases:
Whereas, Slavery: And what about tribes like the Cherokee that OWNED slaves? The Cherokee dragged their slaves on the "Trail of Tears". They are currently mistreating their slaves descendents, hey NAACP, ever hear of the FREEDMEN? Shouldn't you call out the Five Civilized Tribes? And the Freedmen just got screwed in the Cobell Settlement.
Whereas, Civil Rights Struggle: Yet, after that struggle for equality, they have turned on their own people and violated some tribal members, and others civil rights including apartheid like tactics. Should each tribe that has done so be called out as a separate sovereign nation? Should the NAACP be accepting funds from tribes that have done so? We know the CA NAACP has taken money from Pechanga, which is well known to have violated their people's civil rights. And Alice Huffman KNEW about the rights violations.
Whereas, poor living conditions: That's because many of CA tribes have not fullfilled their promise to lift all Indians, and in fact are trying to keep many tribes from benefitting from gaming in CA.
Whereas, Poverty & Unemployment: Gaming tribes in CA have sent their own people into poverty and have terminated many from employment in tribal enterprises. The Pechanga Tribe alone has stolen $280,000,000 for terminated members, more if you include those who rightfully belong, who are kept out via a moratorium. The Redding Rancheria terminated 25% of their tribe and the Picayune Rancheria almost 50%, equal to 15 million Californians. Enough yet to give you pause, NAACP?
Is the NAACP doing it for the money? Or can they stand up for Native Americans who have been wrong by Native Americans.
NAACP you stood up for people AGAINST APARTHEID in South Africa, PLEASE, DO NOT STAND UP FOR people who practice apartheid in America.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Who Offers Leadership To The Pechanga Tribe?
The gauntlet has been thrown down at the Pechanga reservation. Pecahnga tribal chairman Mark Macarro is no longer the golden boy .
Is a Maziel destined to lead the tribe again?
Can Andrew Masiel become the new chairman via another recall attempt? Can he earn the trust of the people when he partners with a child molester?
Can our congress stomach that partnership? Andy should be looking elsewhere for votes
Is a Maziel destined to lead the tribe again?
Can Andrew Masiel become the new chairman via another recall attempt? Can he earn the trust of the people when he partners with a child molester?
Can our congress stomach that partnership? Andy should be looking elsewhere for votes
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Chumash Tribe Sues IRS for Double taxation
Capitol Weekly tells us that The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians has sued the Internal Revenue Service, claiming the agency double-taxed them and owes them a refund that could total in the millions of dollars
But the tribe maintains that this contrasts with California law, which states that casino income is exempt from taxes, but only if the recipient is a member of the casino tribe, living on the same reservation as the casino itself, or if they are living out of state.
The dispute arises out of the 2003 and 2004 tax years. According to Feldman, the IRS could levy these taxes on these revenues from the tribe or directly from its members in their individual tax returns, but not both. Read the rest at the link above.
From the Comments:
The Santa Ynez casino is not located on eligible "Indian Lands" as defined in the Indian Gaming and Regulatory Act. It is not and never was a "reservation" although the tribe calls it a reservation and the land has never been brought into federal Indian trust. In fact the tribe and it's casino operation owes back taxes including unremitted sales taxes it has collected from unsuspecting customers thinking they were paying state "sales tax" when that 8 3/4 percent of each sale was pocketed by the tribe. An audit will likely disclosew they owe back property taxes and state income taxes totalling in the millions. Hopefully this latest attempt by the tribe to get a "refund" of taxes will expose the fact that it is the Sanrta Ynez Chumash that still owes millions in upaid taxes and the end result will be that they will be forced to pay them as they should have been long ago. The State and Santa Barbara County (who furnish all of the public services and infrastructure to the tribe, its casino and related businesses, has been deprived of these tax revenues needed to pay for all these public services and infrastructure and which have been a burden on the other non-Indian taxpayers. Maybe now these non-Indian taxpayers will be made whole!
Stay tuned. But maybe some audits are in order?
But the tribe maintains that this contrasts with California law, which states that casino income is exempt from taxes, but only if the recipient is a member of the casino tribe, living on the same reservation as the casino itself, or if they are living out of state.
The dispute arises out of the 2003 and 2004 tax years. According to Feldman, the IRS could levy these taxes on these revenues from the tribe or directly from its members in their individual tax returns, but not both. Read the rest at the link above.
From the Comments:
The Santa Ynez casino is not located on eligible "Indian Lands" as defined in the Indian Gaming and Regulatory Act. It is not and never was a "reservation" although the tribe calls it a reservation and the land has never been brought into federal Indian trust. In fact the tribe and it's casino operation owes back taxes including unremitted sales taxes it has collected from unsuspecting customers thinking they were paying state "sales tax" when that 8 3/4 percent of each sale was pocketed by the tribe. An audit will likely disclosew they owe back property taxes and state income taxes totalling in the millions. Hopefully this latest attempt by the tribe to get a "refund" of taxes will expose the fact that it is the Sanrta Ynez Chumash that still owes millions in upaid taxes and the end result will be that they will be forced to pay them as they should have been long ago. The State and Santa Barbara County (who furnish all of the public services and infrastructure to the tribe, its casino and related businesses, has been deprived of these tax revenues needed to pay for all these public services and infrastructure and which have been a burden on the other non-Indian taxpayers. Maybe now these non-Indian taxpayers will be made whole!
Stay tuned. But maybe some audits are in order?
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Mixed Blood Uintas Losing Battle of Attrition to Federal Government
When you have the full force of the United States Government trying to exterminate your people, it's difficult to mount a defense of your history and ancestors. Here's a story about the Mixed Blood Uintas, who were terminated by our government.
Here's a link to their website
In this website is chronicled the history of the Ute Partition Act of 1954 (UPA) and the effects it has had on the Terminated mixed blood members of the Uinta band of Ute's and their action to repeal the "UPA". Read and learn the true facts about the Discrimination brought upon 490 once independent, self-supporting, productive American Indian's, who were reduced to welfare rolls in less then ten years.
Here's a link to their website
In this website is chronicled the history of the Ute Partition Act of 1954 (UPA) and the effects it has had on the Terminated mixed blood members of the Uinta band of Ute's and their action to repeal the "UPA". Read and learn the true facts about the Discrimination brought upon 490 once independent, self-supporting, productive American Indian's, who were reduced to welfare rolls in less then ten years.
No Unique Group of Americans illustrates the vulgarity of a failed federal policy more than the Mixed-Blood Uinta's of Utah. Who were once full members of the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation located in northeastern Utah and who find themselves "non grata" in the land of their birth...
A Government policy called termination, carried out in the early 1950's. A policy of assimilating American Indians into main stream American society which was allowed to go "awry". Assimilation designed to force American Indians out of their culture and told to forget their history.
Why have scholars and the mainstream media avoided the saga of the Mixed-Blood Uinta’s? Your first thought would be this doesn't happen in America, would seem the most obvious. But the real reason this story is ignored simply because they are not considered Indian enough and is a kind of “racial dualism” that is deeply rooted in Anglo-American thought, and this dualism carries over into scholarly dichotomies of “Indian and white.” (Warren Metcalf’s “Terminations Legacy” page 3) But the real reason is the vast amount of wealth powerful non-Indian individuals (Grifter's) and entities are receiving, surreptitiously, under the UPA by chicanery and claiming titular which is a canard!
There's a lot to learn from there site. Please take a look
Descendents of Slaves Left off Cobell Settlement; Perpetuates Racial Discrimination
I bet many of you did NOT know that tribes like the Cherokee OWNED SLAVES.
Descendants of slaves owned by the so-called Five Civilized Tribes challenged the $3.4 billion class action settlement in Elouise Cobell et al. v. Ken Salazar, in a class action of their own. The Harvest Institute Freedman Federation says the Cobell settlement was racially discriminatory, with the United States paying off descendants of treasonous Indian slave-owners who took the South's side in the Civil War, while stiffing descendants of the Indians' slaves.
The $3.4 billion settlement in Cobell v. Salazar, which will be implemented under Title I of the Claims Resolution Act of 2010, "is racially discriminatory and perpetuates past unlawful racial discrimination," the Freedman Federation says in its own class action.
During the Civil War, the Seminole, Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek and Chickasaw tribes cut ties with the Union and entered into treaties with the Confederacy. In 1866, the tribes had to make new treaties with the United States to regain their land and trust beneficiary status, according to the complaint.
Part of the deal was emancipation of the tribes' slaves, the Freedmen, and though each treaty was different, the slaves of each tribe were to be accepted into the tribe and given various amounts of land in order for the tribes to be given their trust benefits, the class says.
The Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes were reluctant to take the deal; the Choctaw never gave its freedmen the land they were owed and the Chickasaw never adopted them into the tribe, the complaint states.
The Claims Resolution Act will give the descendents of these tribes assets while denying trust benefits to the freed slaves that were "swindled" of their land.
The Cobell case challenged the government's mishandling of Indian trust assets. The "settlement reaffirms the existence of a trust relationship between the United States and Native Americans dating back to 1887," according to the Freedmen's complaint.
But the class adds, "by reason of racism and misfeasance members of the putative plaintiff class were excluded from the receipt of proceeds of these land transactions and therefore did not have individual money accounts established, although under the treaties with the defendants establishment of these accounts for Freedmen was mandatory."
Read more at COURTHOUSE NEWS Creek Freedmen Cherokee Chief in Hall of SHAME
UPDATE: THANKS to Indian Law Daily for linking to us.
Descendants of slaves owned by the so-called Five Civilized Tribes challenged the $3.4 billion class action settlement in Elouise Cobell et al. v. Ken Salazar, in a class action of their own. The Harvest Institute Freedman Federation says the Cobell settlement was racially discriminatory, with the United States paying off descendants of treasonous Indian slave-owners who took the South's side in the Civil War, while stiffing descendants of the Indians' slaves.
The $3.4 billion settlement in Cobell v. Salazar, which will be implemented under Title I of the Claims Resolution Act of 2010, "is racially discriminatory and perpetuates past unlawful racial discrimination," the Freedman Federation says in its own class action.
During the Civil War, the Seminole, Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek and Chickasaw tribes cut ties with the Union and entered into treaties with the Confederacy. In 1866, the tribes had to make new treaties with the United States to regain their land and trust beneficiary status, according to the complaint.
Part of the deal was emancipation of the tribes' slaves, the Freedmen, and though each treaty was different, the slaves of each tribe were to be accepted into the tribe and given various amounts of land in order for the tribes to be given their trust benefits, the class says.
The Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes were reluctant to take the deal; the Choctaw never gave its freedmen the land they were owed and the Chickasaw never adopted them into the tribe, the complaint states.
The Claims Resolution Act will give the descendents of these tribes assets while denying trust benefits to the freed slaves that were "swindled" of their land.
The Cobell case challenged the government's mishandling of Indian trust assets. The "settlement reaffirms the existence of a trust relationship between the United States and Native Americans dating back to 1887," according to the Freedmen's complaint.
But the class adds, "by reason of racism and misfeasance members of the putative plaintiff class were excluded from the receipt of proceeds of these land transactions and therefore did not have individual money accounts established, although under the treaties with the defendants establishment of these accounts for Freedmen was mandatory."
Read more at COURTHOUSE NEWS Creek Freedmen Cherokee Chief in Hall of SHAME
UPDATE: THANKS to Indian Law Daily for linking to us.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Pala Chairman Robert Smiths Meets With President Obama at Conference
The chairman of the Pala Band of Mission Indians met with President Barack Obama on Thursday as part of a 12-member delegation of tribal leaders to discuss American Indian issues ranging from law enforcement to health care. Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro was not chosen to meet with the President.
The face-to-face meeting with the president was part of the larger White House Tribal Nations Conference, a one-day meeting held at the Department of the Interior in Washington, D.C., to give tribal leaders an opportunity to meet and talk with representatives of the Obama administration.
Pala Chairman Robert Smith said he was honored to have been chosen to represent California Indian tribes at the meeting with the president.
"It was quite an experience," Smith said. "I was surprised and happy."
In the 20-minute meeting, Smith said, he emphasized the need to appoint more American Indian judges in federal courts and the need for more funding for the Bureau of Indian Affairs to provide services for poor and nongambling tribes. Violations of civil rights by Indian tribes should also be a topic of discussion
The face-to-face meeting with the president was part of the larger White House Tribal Nations Conference, a one-day meeting held at the Department of the Interior in Washington, D.C., to give tribal leaders an opportunity to meet and talk with representatives of the Obama administration.
Pala Chairman Robert Smith said he was honored to have been chosen to represent California Indian tribes at the meeting with the president.
"It was quite an experience," Smith said. "I was surprised and happy."
In the 20-minute meeting, Smith said, he emphasized the need to appoint more American Indian judges in federal courts and the need for more funding for the Bureau of Indian Affairs to provide services for poor and nongambling tribes. Violations of civil rights by Indian tribes should also be a topic of discussion
Rincon Lawsuit Against California May Get Supreme Court Review
A lawsuit filed by the Rincon Band of Mission Indians against the state could be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court next year.
The lawsuit was filed in 2004 by the North County tribe after negotiations for a new gambling agreement with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger fell apart. The tribe said the governor was violating federal law by insisting that tribes pay money into the state's general fund in exchange for more slot machines.
"We embarked on this course because Arnold Schwarzenegger's illegal extortion of tribal governmental revenue violates our sovereignty and federal law," Rincon Chairman Bo Mazzetti said.
The tribe stood to lose tens of millions of dollars under a deal offered by the Schwarzenegger administration while generating little for the tribe itself, according to court documents.
Schwarzenegger's office did not return calls for comment. The governor has maintained that the state negotiated in good faith, and he was confident he would prevail in the lawsuit.
The Rincon tribe owns a Harrah's brand casino and hotel in Valley Center. Tribal leaders have said they are willing to pay to offset problems related to their casino as long as the money goes back to local communities and does not stay in state coffers.
Schwarzenegger was elected in 2003 in part on a pledge that he would get gambling tribes to pay more money to the state as a way to offset California's growing budget deficits.
A divided three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. District Court of Appeals in April upheld a lower court ruling that sided with the Rincon band. In the 2-1 ruling, written by Judge Milan Smith Jr., the court said the governor's revenue-sharing demands amounted to an illegal tax.
Schwarzenegger asked the Supreme Court to review the ruling. On Monday, the Supreme Court asked the Obama administration to weigh in on the Rincon case. The Justice Department's opinion could determine whether the justices take up the case in their 2011-12 term or let the appeals court ruling stand.
The lawsuit was filed in 2004 by the North County tribe after negotiations for a new gambling agreement with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger fell apart. The tribe said the governor was violating federal law by insisting that tribes pay money into the state's general fund in exchange for more slot machines.
"We embarked on this course because Arnold Schwarzenegger's illegal extortion of tribal governmental revenue violates our sovereignty and federal law," Rincon Chairman Bo Mazzetti said.
The tribe stood to lose tens of millions of dollars under a deal offered by the Schwarzenegger administration while generating little for the tribe itself, according to court documents.
Schwarzenegger's office did not return calls for comment. The governor has maintained that the state negotiated in good faith, and he was confident he would prevail in the lawsuit.
The Rincon tribe owns a Harrah's brand casino and hotel in Valley Center. Tribal leaders have said they are willing to pay to offset problems related to their casino as long as the money goes back to local communities and does not stay in state coffers.
Schwarzenegger was elected in 2003 in part on a pledge that he would get gambling tribes to pay more money to the state as a way to offset California's growing budget deficits.
A divided three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. District Court of Appeals in April upheld a lower court ruling that sided with the Rincon band. In the 2-1 ruling, written by Judge Milan Smith Jr., the court said the governor's revenue-sharing demands amounted to an illegal tax.
Schwarzenegger asked the Supreme Court to review the ruling. On Monday, the Supreme Court asked the Obama administration to weigh in on the Rincon case. The Justice Department's opinion could determine whether the justices take up the case in their 2011-12 term or let the appeals court ruling stand.
Saturday, December 18, 2010
President Obama Announces Endorsement of UN Declaration; Will POTUS address issues of Human Rights Abuses in INDIAN COUNTRY?
It's a good move for our President to lend his endorsement, but will it be wind through rotted sails? We have so many human rights issues here in Indian Country that many tribal leaders should be EMBARRASSED.
During the second annual Tribal Nations Summit in Washington, DC this morning, President Obama announced that the United States will lend its support to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Prior to this morning's announcement, the United States had been the lone holdout of the original four nations to vote against the adoption of the Declaration by the UN General Assembly in 2007; the other three (Australia, New Zealand, and Canada) have all since reversed their position.
AIRRO held listening sessions on the abuses in Indian Country, that we wrote about in April:
Indians from various parts of Indian Country recently participated in several listening sessions hosted by the American Indian Rights and Resources Organization ("AIRRO"), a Native American civil rights group.
The sessions were held to allow individuals, groups and tribes an opportunity to testify regarding violations of basic human and civil rights in Indian Country. The testimony and recommendations given at each of the sessions will be used by AIRRO to prepare a report which will submitted to the United Nations for use in the Universal Periodic Review of rights issues within the United States.
"The sessions were important for the simple fact that they allowed individuals and groups the opportunity to provide information regarding an issue, that up till now, had gone unreported," stated AIRRO President John Gomez, Jr. "Many people are unaware that tribal officials have committed gross human rights violations against their own citizens. And many more would be surprised to hear that the United States government is largely responsible for allowing the violations to occur and continue."
Please see: Apartheid at Pechanga Genocide in Indian Country Pechanga's ICRA Violations Temecula Massacres
The United States has created an environment for human and civil rights abuses in Indian Country. As long as tribal officials can invoke immunity to escape prosecution and individuals are denied redress for violations of their rights, the number of human rights victims in Indian Country will continue to grow," added Gomez.
The attendees at each of the sessions provided recommendations to address the rights abuses in Indian Country. Well some stated that federal courts should have the authority to review tribal actions that allegedly violate the rights of individuals, most said that the federal government must provide meaningful enforcement of existing laws enacted to protect individuals from abuses by tribal officials.
During the second annual Tribal Nations Summit in Washington, DC this morning, President Obama announced that the United States will lend its support to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Prior to this morning's announcement, the United States had been the lone holdout of the original four nations to vote against the adoption of the Declaration by the UN General Assembly in 2007; the other three (Australia, New Zealand, and Canada) have all since reversed their position.
AIRRO held listening sessions on the abuses in Indian Country, that we wrote about in April:
Indians from various parts of Indian Country recently participated in several listening sessions hosted by the American Indian Rights and Resources Organization ("AIRRO"), a Native American civil rights group.
The sessions were held to allow individuals, groups and tribes an opportunity to testify regarding violations of basic human and civil rights in Indian Country. The testimony and recommendations given at each of the sessions will be used by AIRRO to prepare a report which will submitted to the United Nations for use in the Universal Periodic Review of rights issues within the United States.
"The sessions were important for the simple fact that they allowed individuals and groups the opportunity to provide information regarding an issue, that up till now, had gone unreported," stated AIRRO President John Gomez, Jr. "Many people are unaware that tribal officials have committed gross human rights violations against their own citizens. And many more would be surprised to hear that the United States government is largely responsible for allowing the violations to occur and continue."
Please see: Apartheid at Pechanga Genocide in Indian Country Pechanga's ICRA Violations Temecula Massacres
The United States has created an environment for human and civil rights abuses in Indian Country. As long as tribal officials can invoke immunity to escape prosecution and individuals are denied redress for violations of their rights, the number of human rights victims in Indian Country will continue to grow," added Gomez.
The attendees at each of the sessions provided recommendations to address the rights abuses in Indian Country. Well some stated that federal courts should have the authority to review tribal actions that allegedly violate the rights of individuals, most said that the federal government must provide meaningful enforcement of existing laws enacted to protect individuals from abuses by tribal officials.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
WHY It's Right For Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro To Not Represent Tribes with President Obama
Hunter cousin A'amokat had this in the comment section and we thought it deserved to be promoted to a full post.
Thank you to the Obama administration for not allowing people like Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro to represent Indian country today in Washington DC.
Why, do you say, is this important to us?
Chairman Macarro presided over denying us due process of law when we were disenrolled from the Pechanga tribe in 2006 (OP: We were the second large family to be disenrolled) so he doesn't deserve to represent Indian country to the administration in any way, shape, or form.
Imagine for a moment that your citizenship in your nation was being questioned and you are summoned in front of a government committee, in this case the enrollment committee of your tribe, who had among the panel sitting in judgment of your fate individuals who had filed the initial challenge of your citizenship in the first place.
This first challenge was disallowed for obvious reasons but after this close family members and the friends of those same committee members submitted statements against your citizenship. (OP: Think of it as the relatives of Justice Clarence Thomas, Scalia, Breyer, Ginsburg providing statements demanding the Supreme Court act. Do the words recusal and improper come to mind?)
This time the challenge is allowed and even though you request to Chairman Macarro that those committee members with a clear conflict of interest be made to be recused from ruling on your case, they are allowed to sit in judgement of you and your family's fate. (OP: For good measure, a tribal council members's MOTHER and AUNT are on the committee)
At the initial hearing in front of the government committee questioning your citizenship in your nation you are not allowed to have an attorney present to represent you and you are not allowed to have any copies of the transcripts of the proceedings so even though the committee left out key steps of the procedures in place, you cannot document this without official transcripts so it is your word against the committee's word. (NO representation, no discover, no right to confront accusers, no writing implements, and NO responses from the committee)
Not surprisingly the committee rules against you keeping your citizenship in your nation by a slim one vote margin. (OP: and that one vote was "bought" by enrolling that voter's family, even though a moratorium has kept other family's members OUT of the tribe for a decade.)
The committee consisted of six members who sat in judgement of your keeping your citizenship or not and the committee members with the clear conflict of interest were three of the committee members, all of the votes against your family, with the chair not voting as the chair only would have voted in the event of a tie.
You appeal your case to the executive branch of your government, in this case the tribal council, where one of the councilman is the son of a committee member, the nephew of another committee member, and a close relative of people who submitted statements against your citizenship so he should have been made to be recused from ruling on your appeal but he is also allowed anyway to sit in judgement of your family's fate.
Once again not surprisingly you lose the appeal of the decision to take away your citizenship by one vote.
At this appeal hearing in front of the tribal council you again were not allowed to have an attorney present with you but not only that, you were not allowed to ask any questions or to even to take any notes as note taking instruments of any kind are not allowed in the hearing room per a letter you received from the tribal council prior to the appeal hearing.
The equal protection clause of the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians' constitution and bylaws under Article V, sometimes referred to as the Pechanga Band of Missions Indians, says the following:
"IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS OF THE BAND TO UPHOLD AND ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION, BYLAWS, AND ORDINANCES OF THE TEMECULA BAND OF LUISENO MISSION INDIANS; AND ALSO, TO UPHOLD THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS OF EACH MEMBER WITHOUT MALICE OR PREJUDICE."
So government officials, as you are looking into this blog, our tribe's own constitution was violated when we were disenrolled for, among others, the above reasons.
But if a tribe doesn't follow their own rules, who can make them do so? So we need enforcement of the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA).
Thank you to the Obama administration for not allowing people like Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro to represent Indian country today in Washington DC.
Why, do you say, is this important to us?
Chairman Macarro presided over denying us due process of law when we were disenrolled from the Pechanga tribe in 2006 (OP: We were the second large family to be disenrolled) so he doesn't deserve to represent Indian country to the administration in any way, shape, or form.
Imagine for a moment that your citizenship in your nation was being questioned and you are summoned in front of a government committee, in this case the enrollment committee of your tribe, who had among the panel sitting in judgment of your fate individuals who had filed the initial challenge of your citizenship in the first place.
This first challenge was disallowed for obvious reasons but after this close family members and the friends of those same committee members submitted statements against your citizenship. (OP: Think of it as the relatives of Justice Clarence Thomas, Scalia, Breyer, Ginsburg providing statements demanding the Supreme Court act. Do the words recusal and improper come to mind?)
This time the challenge is allowed and even though you request to Chairman Macarro that those committee members with a clear conflict of interest be made to be recused from ruling on your case, they are allowed to sit in judgement of you and your family's fate. (OP: For good measure, a tribal council members's MOTHER and AUNT are on the committee)
At the initial hearing in front of the government committee questioning your citizenship in your nation you are not allowed to have an attorney present to represent you and you are not allowed to have any copies of the transcripts of the proceedings so even though the committee left out key steps of the procedures in place, you cannot document this without official transcripts so it is your word against the committee's word. (NO representation, no discover, no right to confront accusers, no writing implements, and NO responses from the committee)
Not surprisingly the committee rules against you keeping your citizenship in your nation by a slim one vote margin. (OP: and that one vote was "bought" by enrolling that voter's family, even though a moratorium has kept other family's members OUT of the tribe for a decade.)
The committee consisted of six members who sat in judgement of your keeping your citizenship or not and the committee members with the clear conflict of interest were three of the committee members, all of the votes against your family, with the chair not voting as the chair only would have voted in the event of a tie.
You appeal your case to the executive branch of your government, in this case the tribal council, where one of the councilman is the son of a committee member, the nephew of another committee member, and a close relative of people who submitted statements against your citizenship so he should have been made to be recused from ruling on your appeal but he is also allowed anyway to sit in judgement of your family's fate.
Once again not surprisingly you lose the appeal of the decision to take away your citizenship by one vote.
At this appeal hearing in front of the tribal council you again were not allowed to have an attorney present with you but not only that, you were not allowed to ask any questions or to even to take any notes as note taking instruments of any kind are not allowed in the hearing room per a letter you received from the tribal council prior to the appeal hearing.
The equal protection clause of the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians' constitution and bylaws under Article V, sometimes referred to as the Pechanga Band of Missions Indians, says the following:
"IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS OF THE BAND TO UPHOLD AND ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION, BYLAWS, AND ORDINANCES OF THE TEMECULA BAND OF LUISENO MISSION INDIANS; AND ALSO, TO UPHOLD THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS OF EACH MEMBER WITHOUT MALICE OR PREJUDICE."
So government officials, as you are looking into this blog, our tribe's own constitution was violated when we were disenrolled for, among others, the above reasons.
But if a tribe doesn't follow their own rules, who can make them do so? So we need enforcement of the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA).
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Tribal Reps from Civil Rights Violating Tribes Redding Rancheria, Pechanga and Enterprise DENIED Opportunity to Meet With President Obama
In a bit of good news regarding justice in Indian Country, know human and civil rights violators nominated to represent Indian Country in meeting with President Obama denied opportunity to attend meeting.
Mark Macarro of Pechanga, was nominated to be the representative of the western region: DENIED
OP BLOG Hall of Shame Member and Nominee from Enterprise Rancheria Glenda Nelson: DENIED
The nominee from Redding Rancheria, which eliminated the Foreman Family 8 yrs ago: DENIED
WHO SAID LETTER WRITING AND SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATORS WON'T WORK?
Thank You to White House Staff for DENYING violators a meeting with our President. And CONGRATULATIONS to ROBERT SMITH from PALA for being the west coast representative.
Mark Macarro of Pechanga, was nominated to be the representative of the western region: DENIED
OP BLOG Hall of Shame Member and Nominee from Enterprise Rancheria Glenda Nelson: DENIED
The nominee from Redding Rancheria, which eliminated the Foreman Family 8 yrs ago: DENIED
WHO SAID LETTER WRITING AND SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATORS WON'T WORK?
Thank You to White House Staff for DENYING violators a meeting with our President. And CONGRATULATIONS to ROBERT SMITH from PALA for being the west coast representative.
IETAN CONSULTING: Anatomy of a Lobbying Firm, Working to Keep the Small Tribes From Enjoying the Benefits of Gaming
MOVING this post forward, since the Senate seems so interested today. Thanks for visiting.
Recently at an NCAI (National Conference of American Indians) meeting, a handout worked its way around the meeting. This handout details the incestuous nature of a lobbying group IETAN CONSULTING and allies in the Obama Administration and Congress. This is particularly insightful in light of Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein's recent work to keep tribes from gaining casinos as their land is placed into trust.
We've posted on trust land issues before, concerning Mark Macarro.
While you would hope and think that Native American lobbyists would be working for the good of all Native people, sadly this isn't the case. As the document will show, IETAN has been working to keep smaller tribes from enjoying the benefits of gaming. Isn't that reprehensible?
We've posted numerous times of the civil rights violations of some of IETAN's clients, including the incredibly rich tribe, The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians and other tribes like the Picayune Rancheria and the Redding Rancheria. Comically, they also have clients that Open Secrets lists as HUMAN RIGHTS. How can they give an effort to protect one tribe's human rights, while working for other principal clients that have destroyed the civil and human rights of their people?
Here's the multi-page document on IETAN CONSUTULTING:
Ietan Story: Tribal Lobbyist Firm
Now, this document paints with a broad brush and throws Jack Abrahamoff's name about. We do know there is a connection between former IETAN team member and Abrahamoff, but we'd take that with a grain of salt. We will have more on IETAN, Holly Cook Macarro and AKIN GUMP.
Read more about the brutally corrupt treatment of Indian People at Pechanga, Picayune and Redding.
Recently at an NCAI (National Conference of American Indians) meeting, a handout worked its way around the meeting. This handout details the incestuous nature of a lobbying group IETAN CONSULTING and allies in the Obama Administration and Congress. This is particularly insightful in light of Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein's recent work to keep tribes from gaining casinos as their land is placed into trust.
We've posted on trust land issues before, concerning Mark Macarro.
While you would hope and think that Native American lobbyists would be working for the good of all Native people, sadly this isn't the case. As the document will show, IETAN has been working to keep smaller tribes from enjoying the benefits of gaming. Isn't that reprehensible?
We've posted numerous times of the civil rights violations of some of IETAN's clients, including the incredibly rich tribe, The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians and other tribes like the Picayune Rancheria and the Redding Rancheria. Comically, they also have clients that Open Secrets lists as HUMAN RIGHTS. How can they give an effort to protect one tribe's human rights, while working for other principal clients that have destroyed the civil and human rights of their people?
Here's the multi-page document on IETAN CONSUTULTING:
Ietan Story: Tribal Lobbyist Firm
Now, this document paints with a broad brush and throws Jack Abrahamoff's name about. We do know there is a connection between former IETAN team member and Abrahamoff, but we'd take that with a grain of salt. We will have more on IETAN, Holly Cook Macarro and AKIN GUMP.
Read more about the brutally corrupt treatment of Indian People at Pechanga, Picayune and Redding.
Monday, December 13, 2010
Pechanga Makes it More Difficult for Schools to Receive Money Stolen From Tribal Members
The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians has stolen some $280,000,000 from tribal members they terminated via disenrollment. Now, their friends at the Press Enterprise reports that the tribe will make the schools jump through some hoops to get their donations, which now total over $2.6 million in the last 13 years. Hey, where did the other $277,400,000 go?
Donations from the Pechanga Development Corp. will help purchase varsity uniforms for players at Murrieta Mesa High School, buy music and scripts for Lakeside High School's band, dance and drama programs and support ninth-grade orientation at Chaparral High School in Temecula.
Southwest Riverside County high schools have come to rely on the annual donations from Pechanga, which date to the 1998-99 school year. This year, most schools received $35,000, with Murrieta Mesa receiving $30,000 because it is new and doesn't have a full student body yet.
Educators were probably the most outspoken against perceived 'possible' civil rights violations in AZ after they enacted a law the mirrored federal law. Yet, they casually turn a blind eye to a tribe, Pechanga that HAS violated the civil rights of many of their tribe members. They have:
Donations from the Pechanga Development Corp. will help purchase varsity uniforms for players at Murrieta Mesa High School, buy music and scripts for Lakeside High School's band, dance and drama programs and support ninth-grade orientation at Chaparral High School in Temecula.
Southwest Riverside County high schools have come to rely on the annual donations from Pechanga, which date to the 1998-99 school year. This year, most schools received $35,000, with Murrieta Mesa receiving $30,000 because it is new and doesn't have a full student body yet.
Educators were probably the most outspoken against perceived 'possible' civil rights violations in AZ after they enacted a law the mirrored federal law. Yet, they casually turn a blind eye to a tribe, Pechanga that HAS violated the civil rights of many of their tribe members. They have:
- Taken away tribal citizenship.
- Stripped members of their right to vote
- Take away health care for seniors
- Denied members due process of law, including legal representation, even writing implements
- Herded members into groups for hearings not allowing each to defend themselves
- Subjected some to ex post facto laws
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Censorship of Bad News: Not All News is Fit to Print at Pechanga.net
The website Pechanga.net which is owned by Victor Rocha, a Pechanga tribal member,prides itself on being the internet news resource for Indian Country, should be ashamed this week.
Word came from the Pechanga Reservation in Temecula that long time chairman Mark Macarro, who first made news as the spokesperson for Indian Gaming in California, and later as the chairman who destroyed many lives of longtime Pechanga people by not following the Pechanga Constitution and Bylaws via moratorium, and later with the disenrollment of two large families and their votes, was the subject of a recall petition.
Original Pechanga's Blog contacted Mr. Rocha and asked why we didn't see news of the recall attempt on one of the richest tribe's chairman, he responded that "he didn't consider the blog a news source". That's fair enough, as this blog is still growing, but finding an audience from: The BIA, House of Representatives, Dept. Of Justice, The President's Office, The Senate, all of which have check Original Pechanga's Blog at least once in the last 10 days. Yet, HE is a news source and HE is first cousin to Mark Macarro and his mother used to dine with Hunter descendents regularly. It's curious that Rocha is censoring the bad news, don't you think?
If you bad news of your own tribe, are you and accomplice, or a newsman? Why not let Indian Country know that Macarro is being looked at by members of his own tribe for ouster? There also was no report about a Pechanga tribal member,a manager at the casino that is under investigation from the F.B.I. You, dear readers, make the call.
Word came from the Pechanga Reservation in Temecula that long time chairman Mark Macarro, who first made news as the spokesperson for Indian Gaming in California, and later as the chairman who destroyed many lives of longtime Pechanga people by not following the Pechanga Constitution and Bylaws via moratorium, and later with the disenrollment of two large families and their votes, was the subject of a recall petition.
Original Pechanga's Blog contacted Mr. Rocha and asked why we didn't see news of the recall attempt on one of the richest tribe's chairman, he responded that "he didn't consider the blog a news source". That's fair enough, as this blog is still growing, but finding an audience from: The BIA, House of Representatives, Dept. Of Justice, The President's Office, The Senate, all of which have check Original Pechanga's Blog at least once in the last 10 days. Yet, HE is a news source and HE is first cousin to Mark Macarro and his mother used to dine with Hunter descendents regularly. It's curious that Rocha is censoring the bad news, don't you think?
If you bad news of your own tribe, are you and accomplice, or a newsman? Why not let Indian Country know that Macarro is being looked at by members of his own tribe for ouster? There also was no report about a Pechanga tribal member,a manager at the casino that is under investigation from the F.B.I. You, dear readers, make the call.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)