Trust. Integrity. Reputation. Top News - May - 2004 Volume 22 - Number 2 HISTORIC DAY? Some are optimistic, while others remain sceptical Accused of murder, John Graham fights extradition Cautious optimism here - Editorial Aboriginal media just whistling Dixie - Guest Column Check out Ontario Birchbark THE ENTIRE CONTENTS OF WINDSPEAKER'S MAY ISSUE ARE ONLINE IN THE ARCHIVES - ACCESS IS RESTRICTED TO SUBSCRIBERS ONLY. CLICK HERE FOR ONLINE SUBSCRIPTION INFO. HISTORIC DAY? Some are optimistic, while others remain sceptical Paul Barnsley, Windspeaker Staff Writer, Ottawa More than 70 Aboriginal leaders spent the day with almost as many senior government officials on April 19 at the Government of Canada Conference Centre in Ottawa. The all-day "Canada-Aboriginal Roundtable" saw the leaders of the major national Aboriginal organizations sit down with more than 20 Cabinet ministers and their staff at the invitation of Prime Minister Paul Martin. At a press conference at the end of the day, the Prime Minister called it "a truly extraordinary event." "Today confirmed our collective commitment to making tangible progress, to making changes that could be measured concretely in terms of education, health care, housing, living conditions on reserve, employment, economic development, the special plight of urban Aboriginals and the unique needs of Aboriginal women and youth," Martin said. Martin committed on four next steps. His officials will produce a "what we heard report" and the prime minister "will convene as soon as possible a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Aboriginal Affairs with Aboriginal leaders to bring further detail to our plan of action." He will also ask "individual ministers to conduct a series of policy roundtables in partnership with Aboriginal peoples on key elements of the plan." Perhaps still stinging from Auditor General Sheila Fraser's criticism that federal bureaucrats tend to list activity when accounting for how they spend their time rather than listing accomplishments, the government also committed to produce what the prime minister called a "report card." "The report card will be an important tool to use in keeping us focused. It will tell us and all Canadians how we're doing, what progress we're making and where we simply have to do better if we're to deliver our objective of closing the gap in living conditions for Aboriginal Canadians," he said. The theme of the day was that Martin would provide leadership, while working in partnership with Aboriginal leaders, to "transform" the way government deals with Aboriginal issues. Martin admitted it would not be an easy task. "That being said, let's not underestimate how much work we have to do, but let's not shrink back from it," he said. "Our efforts may encounter doubt because people are used to too little. Well, let's turn this doubt to our purpose. Let it become our motivation. It's time to show people who think the challenges that we face are insurmountable that they're wrong. Let's commit to move forward at a pace that will surprise." The Aboriginal leaders received a number of key commitments and seemed generally optimistic that Martin would follow through. "This has certainly been much more than a photo op," the national chief of the Assembly of First Nations said. "This has been a good day and we're extremely pleased with the opportunity that was afforded us today to engage in real and serious discussions with the government. Thank you, prime minister," said Phil Fontaine. While previous national chiefs have sat outside the rooms where key decisions affecting First Nations' people were being made, Fontaine said he believed Martin was serious about including First Nations' people from now on. "Today's meeting showed the value of the prime minister's statement about, and I quote, 'Ensuring a full seat at the table.' We take this to mean full involvement at all processes, including first ministers' conferences and other processes," he said, as he stood next to Martin at the press conference. "It is important we be fully represented at these very important discussions. Aboriginal peoples include First Nations, Métis and the Inuit. We have some common values and some common processes, but we are not seeking a common pan-Aboriginal agenda. Our diversity must be respected and reflected." Not everyone who wanted to be at the roundtable was able to get in. Fontaine posted a letter on the Assembly of First Nations Web site saying "It is a government of Canada meeting, not a First Nations or an AFN meeting. Therefore, the attendance at this meeting is limited to the people who have been invited by the prime minister. First Nations representatives will include the national chief and the AFN executive committee." Six Nations Chief Roberta Jamieson, one of the national chief's most vocal opponents, was not invited, nor was Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs President Stewart Phillip, another persistent thorn in the side of the current leadership. Most Aboriginal leaders were cautiously optimistic about the day's events, but Phillip worried about the lack of details and the fact that Martin is preparing for an election and might be using Aboriginal leaders to help his party's chances of winning. "From what I've seen from the Prime Minister and our national chief, I have to say that I am personally not satisfied nor the least bit impressed. Our people deserve more specifics about the Martin government's plans for First Nations. While the prime minister was holding his 'summit' his government continues to press forward with Bill C-23, legislation that was rejected by a majority of First Nations across Canada time and time again," he said. "As well, the prime minister continues with his unilateral program spending review. First Nations want concrete changes to the federal government's 1995 Aboriginal self-government policy and their comprehensive land claims policy. We didn't hear the prime minister say he was changing those immoral and illegal policies to at least reflect the current case law. What the prime minister seemed to suggest was that his government is going to ignore the direction set out by recent Supreme Court of Canada in the Delgamuukw and Haida cases, because the 'courts do not define relationships-people do.' Paul Martin is going to continue to keep the B.C. treaty process alive using outdated land claims policy which our members have categorically rejected at its outset." Phil Fontaine's political enemies in British Columbia are a little upset that Fontaine represented them at the summit without first seeking their input. "National Chief Fontaine said today that AFN wants to get rid of the Indian Act and the Department of Indian Affairs. In principle we agree with his statement of that as a goal. But unless the Assembly of First Nations starts acting properly and involving our organization and our membership in the process before they make proposals or 'plans' to the federal government we will not allow the AFN to say they speak for us in federal 'summits' or otherwise," Stewart Phillip said. "[Deputy Prime] Minister [Anne] McLellan asked us 'Do we want to get rid of the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs?' For the Assembly of First Nations the answer is yes," Fontaine said. "There can be no single timeline established to do this but if we can create the momentum to build our own institutions, to renew our government-to-government relationship, then we will establish the pace by which we can achieve this change. As previous national chief George Erasmus pointed out during our discussion, [the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples report] identified the tools for renewing that relationship through specific legislative instruments that include recognition, power sharing and capacity building. And clearly, as First Nations peoples we are pressing to re-establish our land base and just access to resources in our traditional territories to generate the wealth to sustain our communities." Fontaine proposed another attempt be made to deal with the Indian Act. He said First Nations should be involved at every step. "[Indian Affairs] Minister [Andy] Mitchell spoke of the Indian Act and said that he wants to re-engage us in the consultative process. Let me be very clear on this: we cannot re-engage because we were never engaged in the first place," said Fontaine. "We do not want to amend the Indian Act. We want to eliminate the Indian Act. We want it repealed," he said. "We are proposing a national dialogue among First Nations on the requirements to facilitate and foster First Nation governments. We can eliminate the Indian Act and move beyond in a new era by building our capacity, our institutions and securing recognition of our government's jurisdiction through a renewed government-to-government relationship." Fontaine was asked if he expects to be at the table when the prime minister meets with the premiers on health. "We need to be at every table," he replied. "We need to represent ourselves." Emphasizing that his government is making all Aboriginal issues a priority, not only First Nation issues, Paul Martin also announced that the government will deal with a matter that is of crucial importance to Métis people. "There is . . . a great deal of interest in our caucus to basically have a very tangible recognition of Louis Riel's contribution, not just to the Métis Nation but to Canada as a whole," he said. Since it appeared that the prime minister was prepared to take another look at the Indian Act even though he came out against the First Nations governance act during his run for the Liberal Party leadership, Martin was asked what would be different this time around. "The difference is the way in which it began and, in fact, the way in which it was imposed. And what we said is that you cannot do this, you simply cannot do it without full consultation," he said. "And that's the first. The second is that a number of the Aboriginal leaders said also it has to be capacity building and that's why at their suggestion we're setting up the Centre for Good Governance in order to build up that capacity." He also said he supported the abolition of the Department of Indian Affairs (DIAND). "I think it really is the ultimate goal of everybody to see that happen. But again, I think there may well be in the interim amendments to the Indian Act to essentially get us closer and closer to our goal," he said. It was announced during the day that a new Inuit secretariat within DIAND would be created. Inuit leader Jose Kusugak was delighted by the announcement. "When we translate the Indian and Northern Affairs in Inuktitut to what it is supposed to be, in our opinion we call it Inuit-specific department of the federal government," he said. "And at that we've been lying to our people and there was not a single individual in any part of the bureaucracy that deals specifically with Inuit issues." He said he'll be able to hold the government accountable more easily now. Fontaine reminded everyone that moving forward in partnership and respect would require a dramatic break from established Canadian traditions. "Indian Affairs was designed to eradicate any sense of Indian-ness in the country, to eliminate our people. And I don't see one good reason why we should keep things in the Department of Indian Affairs as it is today," he said. "That's not to suggest that we eliminate the legal responsibilities that the federal government has towards First Nations people, the fiduciary responsibility. That's out of the question. As far as the Indian Act, the Indian Act is an archaic, racist piece of federal legislation and we have absolutely no desire to maintain that." Top Accused of murder, John Graham fights extradition Paul Barnsley,Windspeaker Staff Writer, Vancouver On Feb. 6, after a three-day trial, Arlo Looking Cloud, 49, was convicted of aiding and abetting in the murder of Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash. Now there's another trial that may soon be heard in regards to her death, and a man waits in Vancouver under house arrest to see if Canada will ship him across the border to face prosecution in a United States court. Looking Cloud's sentencing hearing was scheduled for April 23, two days after Windspeaker's publication deadline. American law calls for a minimum 25-year sentence for his part in the execution-style slaying of Pictou-Aquash, a member of the American Indian Movement (AIM) in the 1970s. In February 1976, the Mi'kmaq woman from Nova Scotia was found dead in a ditch on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota with a bullet in her head. More than 25 years later, in March 2003, federal prosecutors in the United States secured murder indictments against Looking Cloud and a Canadian citizen named John Graham. Looking Cloud, an alcoholic living on the streets of Denver, Colorado, was arrested almost immediately. Graham, 48, a Tuchone from the Yukon, was arrested in December 2003 in Vancouver. He will attend Federal Court in Vancouver on April 30 to set a date for a hearing where American prosecutors will try to convince a Canadian judge to order Graham extradited to the U.S. The actual extradition hearing is not expected to take place until the fall. It's a case that has many AIM supporters wondering what really happened back in the chaotic hey-day of their time of influence in the '70s. Hoping to be able to line up the facts, Windspeaker interviewed both Graham and Denise Maloney Pictou, the daughter of Anna Mae. Maloney Pictou and her sister Debbie Maloney, an RCMP officer, have been vocal in demanding that Graham stand trial. "Please represent to your readers that our bottom line is that we just want to see Graham stand trial, and for a jury to hear all of the evidence and whatever defence he has, and for the jury to decide-but he has to be extradited for that to happen," said Maloney Pictou. Graham said his lawyers will oppose the extradition, which falls under the Patriot Act in the United States. "The whole extradition procedure, the Patriot Act, it's all unconstitutional," said Graham, hinting at the grounds on which his lawyers intend to fight his removal from Canada. "It violates everybody's human rights. Since 9/11, they've been doing this everywhere. So we're going to argue that whole extradition law, the constitutionality of it all," he said. Those who have long memories will recall that in the mid-1970s, AIM activist Leonard Peltier was extradited from Canada to the U.S. by a Vancouver judge. The affidavit produced by the FBI in that hearing turned out to be based on false evidence. Peltier was soon convicted of murdering two FBI agents during a shoot-out at the Jumping Bull compound at Oglala on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. He has been in jail for almost 29 years, despite world-wide calls for his release. There were many irregularities during his trial and many believe he was falsely convicted. His latest appeal for parole was rejected by the United States Supreme Court in April. U.S authorities believe the deaths of the two FBI agents and the killing of Pictou-Aquash are linked. Graham said he fears that he has been targeted by U.S. officials because he was in the Jumping Bull compound around the time when the agents were killed, and will suffer the same fate as Peltier. "I'm very concerned because this whole thing has been a game by the U.S., by the state, right from the start. From the time of the first and second autopsies [of Pictou-Aquash] they've been bungling and fumbling this case," he said. The first autopsy performed on the frozen body was badly bungled. FBI coroner W.O. Brown, missing the bullet in the body's head, concluded the death was due to exposure. The John Graham Defense Committee (JGDC) allege Brown's coroner reports were routinely used to minimize or conceal the causes of deaths resulting from police/paramilitary attacks during this time of turmoil in U.S.-Indian relations. More than 60 members or associates of AIM were killed on Pine Ridge between 1973 and 1976. The JGDC alleges that many of those deaths were at the hands of Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) police and GOONs-Guardians of the Oglala Nation, a tribal police force employed by tribal president Dick Wilson. In order to identify the body, the coroner cut of the hands sent them to an FBI lab in Washington, DC for fingerprint analysis. Still unidentified, the body was buried in Pine Ridge on March 2, 1976. The next day, the FBI identification division revealed the body to be that of Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash. The JGDC Web site states that on "March 5, her family in Nova Scotia was notified, and they demanded a second autopsy." But Maloney Pictou told Windspeaker it was the FBI that demanded the second autopsy. Dr. Garry Peterson, a doctor that worked in the area and was recommended by the AIM members, conducted the second autopsy. "From that day to this he has been questioned about this theory that FBI collusion led to the 'botched' first autopsy and that it was part of an FBI cover-up, a theory Dr. Peterson has dispelled and consistently said that he does not believe," said Maloney Pictou. "Dr. Peterson's testimony at Arlo Looking Cloud's trial reflected that, and I think his expert opinion is more credible than that of the John Graham Defense Committee," she said. "If the FBI had been responsible for my mother's murder, they would have known who she was and how she died. So they would not have wanted a second autopsy, and they certainly wouldn't have wanted a pathologist employed by [the Wounded Knee Legal Defense Committee] and AIM to perform that autopsy and to discover how she died. For the record, W.O. Brown, who performed the 'botched' first autopsy, was contracted by the BIA to perform autopsies on Pine Ridge and his contract was cancelled after the autopsy he performed on my mother's body." The night of Pictou-Aquash's death, the FBI alleges she was taken from a house in Denver by AIM members Graham, Looking Cloud and a woman named Theda Clark, who has not been implicated in the murder. The FBI asserts she was driven to various offices in Rapid City, South Dakota. One of these included the legal offices of the Wounded Knee defense committee. From there, it is alleged Pictou-Aquash was taken to houses on Pine Ridge and then executed. The FBI alleges that Pictou-Aquash was suspected by the AIM membership of being an informant and knew sensitive information related to the Oglala shoot-out where the FBI agents died, and because of this knowledge she was killed. Graham has always maintained his innocence, and admits to driving Pictou-Aquash from Denver to Pine Ridge, where she was left at a safe house. He claims he was her friend and only learned later that she had been killed. He was asked why Anna Mae's daughters seem to believe he and Looking Cloud are guilty. "They're being led to believe that. I imagine they are feeling resentment or anger towards AIM as a movement for their mother being involved," he said. Maloney Pictou said that the only things that lead her to believe Graham is guilty is the evidence that came out at Looking Cloud's trial, and a conversation she had with Looking Cloud himself. Maloney Pictou alleges that during a phone conversation with Arlo Looking Cloud, he told her and her sister that John Graham "shot our mother" and that Looking Cloud was an eyewitness. Although the JGDC disputes the reliability of it, there is a video-taped confession by Alro Looking Cloud that was shown at his trial. The JGDC points out that on the video Looking Cloud admits he'd been drinking. "In his videotaped admission Arlo states... 'John Graham shot Anna Mae in the head as she was praying,'" Denise Maloney Pictou said. Graham said that as a hard-core alcoholic who had been living on the streets for many years, Looking Cloud could have been easily confused and manipulated by the police and prosecutors. "The feds, the state has been doing this on AIM for years now. Disinformation, misinformation and putting out false memos, rumors and innuendoes. It's still being done today," he said. "They've got conflicting reports about the whole thing. This whole case is just haywire. The fact that the FBI and the GOONs have distanced themselves from any involvement and they're getting away with it, that blows me away. And I cannot understand why the daughters would agree that, with Arlo, there was a trial that took place there, that there was any kind of justice. That was a manufactured, guaranteed conviction for the state. That's all that was." He was asked why he believed that. "There was 1,001 questions that were never asked. He had no defence. The defence lawyer was a state-appointed lawyer that was working for the state. They were going to convict anybody. They did it with Leonard, they did it with Arlo and I know they'll do the same with me. There's no chance I'll even be able to present a defence," he said. Maloney Pictou believes the evidence that came out at trial was convincing. "Twenty-three prosecution witnesses, the most damning being former AIM members, all provided sworn testimony that demonstrated Looking Cloud's complicity and guilt in the murder of my mother," she said. "Looking Cloud's defence was that he didn't shoot her or know that she was going to be shot." In his sworn testimony, Looking Cloud said he was surprised when Graham shot Pictou-Aquash. Maloney Pictou said Graham's supporters and attorney are trying to deal with that testimony by creating a controversy about the quality of the Looking Could defence at trial. "Looking Cloud was found guilty by a multi-racial jury (Lakota, African-American, and white) after seven hours of deliberation," she said. Graham insists this is a cold-blooded, long-term FBI plan to avenge the death of their two brother officers at Oglala. "Look at the players now. All of the agents that are retired now that are coming after me that were involved with the Oglala shoot-out. This is like a vendetta that they're carrying out against AIM," he said. He said he was at Jumping Bull "before and after" the shooting and is associated in the minds of the FBI agents with the deaths of the two agents. "In the Oglala shoot-out, they've come up with a list of names, the FBI did. Forty-seven names of people that they believed to be in and around that area of the shoot-out. And those are the people they're coming after." Maloney Pictou will have none of that. "Graham talks about being 'railroaded' and 'sham' trials, but what kind of trial did our mother get?" Top