Paging Gazhekwe

[gazhekwe]

The prophecy of the Seventh Generation is common to many American Indian nations. Young native people, especially young Mohawk people, should pay attention to and consider.

According to the prophecy, after seven generations of living in close contact with the Europeans, the Onkwehonwe would see the day when the elm trees would die. The prophecy said that animals would be born strange and deformed, their limbs twisted out of shape. Huge stone monsters would tear open the face of the earth. The rivers would burn aflame. The air would burn the eyes of man. According to the prophecy of the Seventh Generation the Onkwehonwe would see the day when birds would fall from the sky, the fish would die in the water, and man would grow ashamed of the way that he had treated his mother and provider, the Earth.

Finally, according to this prophecy, after seven generations of living in close contact with the Europeans, the Onkwehonwe would rise up and demand that their rights and stewardship over the Earth be respected and restored.

According to the wisdom of this prophecy, men and women would one day turn to the Onkwehonwe, and particularly to the eastern door of the Confederacy, for both guidance and direction. It is up to the present generation of youth of the Kanien'kehake to provide leadership and example to all who have failed. The children of the Kanien'kehake are the seventh generation.

[gazhekwe]

This is from a blog post. Seattle911, A Police Blog:

Jurors in the shooting inquest of John T. Williams, who was killed in a confrontation with a Seattle police officer, received a list of questions Wednesday that they're required to answer.

The six jurors, who can deliberate with two alternates that don't vote, are asked to find whether the shooting was justified, but their finding will have no immediate impact. King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg will make a charging decision after the inquest is complete. The jurors can answer "yes," "no," or "unknown." They do not have to reach consensus.

Here are the questions, finalized Wednesay morning:

1. On August 30, 2010, did Seattle Police Officer Ian Birk observe John T. Williams crossing the street?

2. Was John T. Williams holding an open knife at the time he was first observed by Officer Birk?

3. Did Officer Birk get out of his patrol car to contact John T. Williams?

4. Did Officer Birk gesture to John T. Williams to come back to Officer Birk's location?

5. Did John T. Williams have a knife in his hand when Officer Birk contacted him?

6. Did Officer Birk order John T. Williams to put the knife down?
If your answer to question 6 was yes, please answer the following 4 questions:
6a. Did Officer Birk order John T. Williams to put the knife down more than once?
6b. Did John T. Williams have sufficient time to put the knife down after Officer Birk's order?
6c. Did John T. Williams try to put the knife down after Officer Birk's order?
6d. Did John T. Williams put the knife down before Officer Birk began to fire his weapon?

7. Was the front of John T. Williams' upper body partially turned towards Officer Birk when Officer Birk began to fire his weapon?

7a. If no, was John T. Williams turning towards Officer Birk when Officer Birk fired his weapon?

8. Did Officer Birk fire his weapon at John T. Williams on August 30, 2010?

9. When Officer Birk fired his weapon, did John T. Williams have a knife in his hand?
9a. If yes, was John T. William's knife blade open when Officer Birk fired his weapon?

10. Did Officer Birk believe that John T. Williams posed an imminent threat of serious physical harm to Officer Birk at the time Officer Birk fired his weapon?

11. Based on the information available at the time Officer Birk fired his weapon, did John T. Williams then pose an imminent threat of serious physical harm to Officer Birk?

12. Did John T. Williams die in King County on August 30, 2010?

13. Did John T. Williams die from the gunshot wounds caused by Officer Birk?

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattle911...ves/236331.asp

Notice, none of the following questions is asked:
Was John T. Williams carrying something besides the knife?
Was it a piece of wood?
Was John T. Williams a carver of wood?
Was John T. Williams using the knife as he walked?
Did Officer Birk identify himself as police at any time?
Was the knife illegal?
Did Officer Birk have cause to address Mr. Williams?
Was John T. Williams' back towards the officer as the officer shouted at him?
Did John T. Williams have time to close the blade after getting shot?
Was there sufficient opportunity for John T. Williams to hear the shouting, realize it was directed at him, realize that it was a police officer shouting at him?
Was John T. Williams hard of hearing? [No testimony was introduced to support that he was or was not].

It is hard to see how they could answer anything but 'unknown' to some of the crucial questions, such as the position and state of the knife. -- Gazhekwe

[gazhekwe]

The reporter did not give the answers to all the questions. The answers she reported are in BOLD below. I will add others as I find out.

1. On August 30, 2010, did Seattle Police Officer Ian Birk observe John T. Williams crossing the street?

2. Was John T. Williams holding an open knife at the time he was first observed by Officer Birk? Yes

3. Did Officer Birk get out of his patrol car to contact John T. Williams?

4. Did Officer Birk gesture to John T. Williams to come back to Officer Birk's location?

5. Did John T. Williams have a knife in his hand when Officer Birk contacted him?

6. Did Officer Birk order John T. Williams to put the knife down?
If your answer to question 6 was yes, please answer the following 4 questions:
6a. Did Officer Birk order John T. Williams to put the knife down more than once?
6b. Did John T. Williams have sufficient time to put the knife down after Officer Birk's order? 1 Yes, 3 Unknown, 4 No
6c. Did John T. Williams try to put the knife down after Officer Birk's order? Unknown
6d. Did John T. Williams put the knife down before Officer Birk began to fire his weapon?

7. Was the front of John T. Williams' upper body partially turned towards Officer Birk when Officer Birk began to fire his weapon?
7a. If no, was John T. Williams turning towards Officer Birk when Officer Birk fired his weapon?
8. Did Officer Birk fire his weapon at John T. Williams on August 30, 2010?
9. When Officer Birk fired his weapon, did John T. Williams have a knife in his hand? Yes
9a. If yes, was John T. William's knife blade open when Officer Birk fired his weapon?

10. Did Officer Birk believe that John T. Williams posed an imminent threat of serious physical harm to Officer Birk at the time Officer Birk fired his weapon? 4 Yes, 4 Unknown

11. Based on the information available at the time Officer Birk fired his weapon, did John T. Williams then pose an imminent threat of serious physical harm to Officer Birk? 4 No, 1 Yes, 3 Unknown

12. Did John T. Williams die in King County on August 30, 2010?

13. Did John T. Williams die from the gunshot wounds caused by Officer Birk?

The jury is free to discuss the matter now. Waiting for info on what is happening now.
All evidence seen by the court will now be publicly released.

The Prosecutor will now take these results into consideration along with the findings of the Firearms Review Board in determining which if any charges will be filed.

The Firearms Review Board [[FRB) is an internal Seattle Police Department group that reviews any discharge of a firearm by a Seattle police officer. Its purpose is to determine whether an officer’s actions conformed to department policy and regulations, training guidelines, and applicable law. Based upon its findings, the FRB may recommend to the police chief further action or make referrals for further investigation.

The lawyers have clarified that these are UNPRECEDENTED inquest jury findings, and though nothing is guaranteed, they represent a favorable outcome.

The attorneys have also clarified that it's the KC PROSECUTOR who decides which evidence can be presented or not to the jury. The attorneys do not understand why the jury was not allowed to know of the late Mr. William's hearing impairment, or any other pertinent information not allowed.

The pursuit of this matter in federal court begins immediately.

The attorneys are meeting with Pat Sparrow, for those who are concerned for his well-being [Pat Sparrow is a Navajo man who was walking at night about a week after John T. Williams was killed, was flanked by two SPD cars with their lights on, blinding him. He was ordered to sit on the hood of one of the cars, which he did. A third car pulled up nearby. They then turned off their lights. He was then beaten, fell to the ground and was kicked so severely that he lost consciousness and woke up in the hospital. There were no charges filed against him, and he is afraid for his life to come out against the SPD. A number of people have expressed concern that outing him like this will put him in extreme danger, particularly since he has become homeless since the beating. He states he talked freely with others before the beating about the harassment of John T. Williams by police, and wondered if the beating was the result of his talk

People are also concerned about the reporter [[not a real reporter, just the person who has been keeping us updated so faithfully). She noted police hostility the week after the death of John T. as well. She and relatives of John T. were sitting in a park near the site of the shooting. Several bicycle officers congregated directly across the street and commenced to walk about and stare at the group in what she said was a threatening manner. The relatives stated this had been happening to them every day. The reporter walked across the street to ask the officers what they were doing and they were verbally hostile and threatening to her. .She states the officers present in the courtroom have directed hostile glares at her.

Someone posted there will be no decision until mid-February, don't know if she has inside knowledge or is just guessing.

Link to Seattle Times Blotter with Jurors' answers: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...t_20_2010.html

Link to Seattle Times Report: Inquest jury says Williams didn't have time to drop knife: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...nquest21m.html

[gazhekwe]

Cloud Catcher, a handsome youth of the Ojibways, offended his family by refusing to fast during the ceremony of his coming of age, and was put out of the paternal wigwam. It was so fine a night that the sky served him as well as a roof, and he had a boy's confidence in his ability to make a living.

He dropped upon a tuft of moss to plan for his future, and drowsily noted the rising of the moon in which he seemed to see a face. On awakening he found that it was not day, yet the darkness was half dispelled by light that glowed in rays from a figure near him--the form of a lovely woman.

"Cloud Catcher, I have come for you," she said. And as she turned away he felt impelled to rise and follow. But, instead of walking, she began to move into the air with the flight of an eagle, and, endowed with a new power, he too ascended beside her. The earth was dim and vast below, stars blazed as they drew near them, yet the radiance of the woman seemed to dull their glory.

Presently they passed through a gate of clouds and stood on a beautiful plain, with crystal ponds and brooks watering noble trees and leagues of flowery meadow. Birds of brightest colors darted here and there, singing like flutes; the very stones were agate, jasper and chalcedony. An immense lodge stood on the plain, and within were embroideries and ornaments, couches of rich furs, pipes and arms cut from jasper and tipped with silver.

While the young man was gazing around him with delight, the brother of his guide appeared and reproved her, advising her to send the young man back to earth at once, but, she flatly refused to do so, he gave a pipe and bow and arrows to Cloud Catcher, as a token of his consent to their marriage, and wished them happiness, which, in fact, they had.

This brother, who was commanding, tall, and so dazzling in his gold and silver ornaments that one could hardly look upon him, was abroad all day, while his sister was absent for a part of the night. He permitted Cloud Catcher to go with him on one of his daily walks, and as they crossed the lovely Sky Land they glanced down through open valley bottoms on the green earth below. The rapid pace they struck gave Cloud Catcher an appetite and he asked if there were no game.

"Patience," counseled his companion.

On arriving at a spot where a large hole had been broken through the sky they reclined on mats, and the tall man, loosing one of his silver ornaments, flung it into a group of children playing before a lodge. On of the little ones fell and was carried within, amid lamentations. Then the villagers left their sports and labors and looked up at the sky.

The tall man cried, in a voice of thunder, "Offer a sacrifice and the child shall be well again."

A white dog was killed, roasted, and in a twinkling it shot up the feet of Cloud Catcher, who, being empty, attacked it voraciously.

Many such walks and feasts came after, and the sights of earth and taste of meat filled the mortal with longing to see his people again. He told his wife that he wanted to go back.

She consented, after a time, saying, "Since you are better pleased with the cares, the ills, the labor, and the poverty of the world than with the comfort and abundance of Sky Land, you may return; but remember you are still my husband, and beware how you venture to take an earthly maiden for a wife."

She arose lightly, clasped Cloud Catcher by the wrist, and began to move with him through the air. The motion lulled him and he fell asleep, waking at the door of his father's lodge.

His relatives gathered and gave him welcome, and he learned that he had been in the sky for a year. He took the labors of a hunter's and warrior's life less kindly than he thought to, and after a time he enlivened its monotony by taking to wife a bright-eyed girl of his tribe. In four days she was dead. The lesson was unheeded and he married again.

Shortly after, he stepped from his lodge one evening and never came back. The woods were filled with a strange radiance on that night, and it is asserted that Cloud Catcher was taken back to the lodge of the Sun and Moon, and is now content to live in heaven.

[gazhekwe]

One day long ago, Grizzly Bear was traveling through the hills near a river. He came upon Buffalo Bull standing in the trail. Buffalo's head was hanging down as if he were weak and sick.

"Ho! Crooked Horns," said Bear. "They say you have been saying you will go to war with me! Put on your war paint now and we will have a big fight!"

"I do not want to fight with you, Rootdigger," Buffalo replied. "I want peace, not war."

"Ho!" said Bear. "Crooked Horns, you are a coward! You want to run away like an old woman! You are afraid of me!" Then Bear came close and pulled Buffalo's hair and pushed his nose down into the dust. Then he pulled Buffalo's tail and slapped him as hard as he could.

"Oh! Rootdigger, you have caused me great pain," said Buffalo as he limped away. "I have done nothing to you and you still have hurt me. That is not right"

"Ho! You are a coward Crooked Horns! You have the heart of an old woman and you fear me," said Bear as he turned to continue his travels. "Ho! I laugh at you! You are a coward!"

As Bear walked away, Buffalo thought to himself, "I really ought to fight him for he is just a mean bully."

Bear, by his magic powers, knew what Buffalo was thinking, so he came back and said, "What was that you said about me, Crooked Horns?"

Buffalo said, "I said nothing about you."

"You speak with two tongues," said Bear. "You were talking in your mind about me and I know it!" Then he mauled Buffalo again, pulling his hair and slapping him. And then he went away laughing.

Buffalo thought again to himself, "Now I should surely fight him for he is always picking on someone and wanting to fight."

Again Bear knew what Buffalo was thinking and came back and snarled and abused him. Four times this happened. The fifth time, when Bear started to come back to Buffalo, Buffalo backed away and began pawing the earth, still begging Bear not to hurt him.

Bear said, "Don't run away Old Woman Crooked Horns. Don't run away. Stand and fight me, Crooked Horns Coward!"

But Buffalo kept backing away, and at last, when he was at the edge of a steep bank, he rushed at Bear and knocked him flat. Buffalo stood over Bear and tried to pin him down to the ground with his sharp black horns.

"Ho! Do not spear me with your horns! You cause me great pain, Crooked Horns!" cried Bear as he scrambled about, trying to get away from Buffalo.

"You wanted to go to war," said Buffalo. "Now why don't you stand up and fight, Old Woman Rootdigger? Why don't you fight me now, I say?"

At last Bear scrambled too close to the edge of the high bank, and over he went, right down to the bottom of the river valley. There he lay on his back, where he had fallen, crying and begging Buffalo to let him come up again.

Buffalo stood at the top of the bank watching Bear. At last he said, "You are the kind of person who always wants to fight the weak. I should finish this fight and make you pay dearly to teach you a lesson, instead of letting you come back up here to bother decent people."

Bear cried, "If you will let me come up, we will make peace and fight no more."

So. at last, Buffalo let Bear come back up. Since that time Bear and Buffalo have been at peace. But Bear still has his bad temper.

That is how one bully found someone who was not fearful of him and was hurt the way he had been hurting others! A bully has no real courage, and somewhere, sometime, he is going to learn a lesson in life that will hurt him.

[gazhekwe]

WHY BLACKFEET NEVER KILL MICE
MUSKRAT and his grandmother were gathering wood for the camp the next morning, when they came to an old buffalo skull. The plains were dotted with these relics of the chase, for already the hide-hunting white man had played havoc with the great herds of buffalo. This skull was in a grove of cottonwood-trees near the river, and as they approached two Mice scampered into it to hide. Muskrat, in great glee, secured a stick and was about to turn the skull over and kill the Mice, when his grandmother said: "No, our people never kill Mice. Your grandfather will tell you why if you ask him. The Mice-people are our friends and we treat them as such. Even small people can be good friends, you know -- remember that."
All the day the boy wondered why the Mice-people should not be harmed; and just at dark he came for me to accompany him to War Eagle's lodge. On the way he told me what his grandmother had said, and that he intended to ask for the reason, as soon as we arrived. We found the other children already there, and almost before we had seated ourselves, Muskrat asked:
"Grandfather, why must we never kill the Mice-people? Grandmother said that you knew."
"Yes," replied War Eagle, "I do know and you must know. Therefore I shall tell you all to-night why the Mice-people must be let alone and allowed to do as they please, for we owe them much; much more than we can ever pay. Yes -- they are great people, as you will see.
" It happened long, long ago, when there were few men and women on the world. Old-man was chief of all then, and the animal-people and the bird-people were greater than our people, because we had not been on earth long and were not wise.
"There was much quarrelling among the animals and the birds. You see the Bear wanted to be chief, under Old-man, and so did the Beaver. Almost every night they would have a council and quarrel over it. Beside the Bear and Beaver, there were other animals, and also birds, that thought they had the right to be chief. They couldn't agree and the quarrelling grew worse as time went on. Some said the greatest thief should be chosen. Others thought the wisest one should be the leader; while some said the swiftest traveller was the one they wanted. So it went on and on until they were most all enemies instead of friends, and you could hear them quarrelling almost every night, until Old-man came along that way.
"He heard about the trouble. I forget who told him, but I think it was the Rabbit. Anyhow he visited the council where the quarrelling was going on and listened to what each one had to say. It took until almost daylight, too. He listened to it all -- every bit. When they had finished talking and the quarrelling commenced as usual, he said, 'stop!' and they did stop.
"Then he said to them: 'I will settle this thing right here and right now, so that there will be no more rows over it, forever.'
"He opened his paint sack and took from it a small, polished bone. This he held up in the firelight, so that they might all see it, and he said:
"'This will settle the quarrel. You all see this bone in my right hand, don't you?'
"'Yes,' they replied.
"'Well, now you watch the bone and my hands, too, for they are quick and cunning.'
"Old-man began to sing the gambling song and to slip the bone from one hand to the other so rapidly and smoothly that they were all puzzled. Finally he stopped singing and held out his hands -- both shut tight, and both with their backs up.
"'Which of my hands holds the bone now?' he asked them.
"Some said it was in the right hand and others claimed that it was the left hand that held it. Old-man asked the Bear to name the hand that held the bone, and the Bear did; but when Old-man opened that hand it was empty -- the bone was not there. Then everybody laughed at the Bear. Old-man smiled a little and began to sing and again pass the bone.
"'Beaver, you are smart; name the hand that holds the bone this time.'
"The Beaver said: 'It's in your right hand. I saw you put it there.'
"Old-man opened that hand right before the Beaver's eyes, but the bone wasn't there, and again everybody laughed -- especially the Bear.
"'Now, you see,' said Old-man, 'that this is not so easy as it looks, but I am going to teach you all to play the game; and when you have all learned it, you must play it until you find out who is the cleverest at the playing. Whoever that is, he shall be chief under me, forever.'
"Some were awkward and said they didn't care much who was chief, but most all of them learned to play pretty well. First the Bear and the Beaver tried it, but the Beaver beat the Bear easily and held the bone for ever so long. Finally the Buffalo beat the Beaver and started to play with the Mouse. Of course the Mouse had small hands and was quicker than the Buffalo -- quicker to see the bone. The Buffalo tried hard for he didn't want the Mouse to be chief but it didn't do him any good; for the Mouse won in the end.
"It was a fair game and the Mouse was chief under the agreement. He looked quite small among the rest but he walked right out to the centre of the council and said:
"'Listen, brothers -- what is mine to keep is mine to give away. I am too small to be your chief and I know it. I am not warlike. I want to live in peace with my wife and family. I know nothing of war. I get my living easily. I don't like to have enemies. I am going to give my right to be chief to the man that Old-man has made like himself.'
"That settled it. That made the man chief forever, and that is why he is greater than the animals and the birds. That is why we never kill the Mice-people.
"You saw the Mice run into the buffalo skull, of course. There is where they have lived and brought up their families ever since the night the Mouse beat the Buffalo playing the bone game. Yes -- the Mice-people always make their nests in the heads of the dead Buffalo-people, ever since that night.
"Our people play the same game, even to-day. See," and War Eagle took from his paint sack a small, polished bone. Then he sang just as Old-man did so long ago. He let the children try to guess the hand that held the bone, as the animal-people did that fateful night; but, like the animals, they always guessed wrong. Laughingly War Eagle said:
"Now go to your beds and come to see me to-morrow night. Ho!"


This is from a mix of Chippewa-Cree and Blackfeet stories from the Great Plains of Montana, published in 1915 by Frank B. Linderman, Sparks from War Eagle's Lodge Fire.

[gazhekwe]

Rainbow Crow

[[Lenni Lenape Tribe)
retold by S. E. Schlosser, Spooky New Jersey

It was so cold. Snow fell constantly, and ice formed over all the waters. The animals had never seen snow before. At first, it was a novelty, something to play in. But the cold increased tenfold, and they began to worry. The little animals were being buried in the snow drifts and the larger animals could hardly walk because the snow was so deep. Soon, all would perish if something were not done.

"We must send a messenger to Kijiamuh Ka'ong, the Creator Who Creates By Thinking What Will Be," said Wise Owl. "We must ask him to think the world warm again so that Spirit Snow will leave us in peace."

The animals were pleased with this plan. They began to debate among themselves, trying to decide who to send up to the Creator. Wise Owl could not see well during the daylight, so he could not go. Coyote was easily distracted and like playing tricks, so he could not be trusted. Turtle was steady and stable, but he crawled too slowly. Finally, Rainbow Crow, the most beautiful of all the birds with shimmering feathers of rainbow hues and an enchanting singing voice, was chosen to go to Kijiamuh Ka'ong.

It was an arduous journey, three days up and up into the heavens, passed the trees and clouds, beyond the sun and the moon, and even above all the stars. He was buffeted by winds and had no place to rest, but he carried bravely on until he reached Heaven. When Rainbow Crow reached the Holy Place, he called out to the Creator, but received no answer. The Creator was too busy thinking up what would be to notice even the most beautiful of birds. So Rainbow Crow began to sing his most beautiful song.

The Creator was drawn from his thoughts by the lovely sound, and came to see which bird was making it. He greeted Rainbow Crow kindly and asked what gift he could give the noble bird in exchange for his song. Rainbow Crow asked the Creator to un-think the snow, so that the animals of Earth would not be buried and freeze to death. But the Creator told Rainbow Crow that the snow and the ice had spirits of their own and could not be destroyed.

"What shall we do then?" asked the Rainbow Crow. "We will all freeze or smother under the snow."

"You will not freeze," the Creator reassured him, "For I will think of Fire, something that will warm all creatures during the cold times."

The Creator stuck a stick into the blazing hot sun. The end blazed with a bright, glowing fire which burned brightly and gave off heat. "This is Fire," he told Rainbow Crow, handing him the cool end of the stick. "You must hurry to Earth as fast as you can fly before the stick burns up."

Rainbow Crow nodded his thanks to the Creator and flew as fast as he could go. It was a three-day trip to Heaven, and he was worried that the Fire would burn out before he reached the Earth. The stick was large and heavy, but the fire kept Rainbow Crow warm as he descended from Heaven down to the bright path of the stars. Then the Fire grew hot as it came closer to Rainbow Crows feathers. As he flew passed the Sun, his tail caught on fire, turning the shimmering beautiful feathers black. By the time he flew passed the Moon, his whole body was black with soot from the hot Fire. When he plunged into the Sky and flew through the clouds, the smoke got into his throat, strangling his beautiful singing voice.

By the time Rainbow Crow landed among the freezing-cold animals of Earth, he was black as tar and could only Caw instead of sing. He delivered the fire to the animals, and they melted the snow and warmed themselves, rescuing the littlest animals from the snow drifts where they lay buried.

It was a time of rejoicing, for Tindeh - Fire - had come to Earth. But Rainbow Crow sat apart, saddened by his dull, ugly feathers and his rasping voice. Then he felt the touch of wind on his face. He looked up and saw the Creator Who Creates By Thinking What Will Be walking toward him.

"Do not be sad, Rainbow Crow," the Creator said. "All animals will honor you for the sacrifice you made for them. And when the people come, they will not hunt you, for I have made your flesh taste of smoke so that it is no good to eat and your black feathers and hoarse voice will prevent man from putting you into a cage to sing for him. You will be free."

Then the Creator pointed to Rainbow Crow's black feathers. Before his eyes, Rainbow Crow saw the dull feathers become shiny and inside each one, he could see all the colors of the rainbow. "This will remind everyone who sees you of the service you have been to your people," he said, "and the sacrifice you made that saved them all."

And so shall it ever be.

[gazhekwe]

Written by a Native attorney:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...est27ross.html

Guest columnist
Seattle's inquest system needs better scrutiny

Though the jurors in the Officer Ian Birk inquest have left room for the possibility of charges in the shooting of John T. Williams, it is an imperfect system. Guest columnist Gyasi Ross urges more scrutiny that better respects the person who has died.
By Gyasi Ross

LAST Thursday, I bit my tongue when the jurors in the Ian Birk inquest handed down their findings.

I wanted to smile when four jurors agreed with what common sense told us — that Seattle Police Officer Birk was not in any imminent danger when he shot Native woodcarver John T. Williams Aug. 30. I wanted to be happy that four jurors saw through the smoke screen that Birk's attorney, Ted Buck, concocted, asserting that Birk gave Williams sufficient time to put down his knife. I wanted to celebrate when most jurors concluded Williams was not facing Birk when Birk shot him.

This was a victory for transparency in government, for people who feel bullied by public servants. This was a victory for common sense.

Right?

Well, maybe not. Perhaps before we claim the Birk inquest as a unilateral victory for the people of Seattle, we should put the decision into the context of state law and also 40 years of inquests.

Although the inquest jurors handed down findings that leave room for the possibility that Birk could be charged criminally, there is no guarantee King County prosecutors will pursue charges against their fellow public servant. In fact, there is really no reason to believe that prosecutors have any incentive to bring criminal charges — even assuming that they want to.

Washington has fairly lenient laws that protect police officers from criminal prosecution anytime the officer claims they used deadly force in self-defense, unless it can be shown he or she acted with malice and a lack of good faith. That's right — the police officer only has to "claim" that he used the deadly force in self-defense.

Therefore, even if the prosecutors want to charge Birk, they may believe that such action is futile.

There are many reasons this inquest was an anomaly, and also many reasons that inquests remain fool's gold for Seattleites seeking justice, including the following:
• Inquests put the dead person on trial. Unfortunately, the dead person is not around to deliver his or her side of the story, so the officer can characterize the deceased however he wants. Birk spoke of Williams' "very stern, very serious, very confrontational look" and his "confrontational posture."

Fortunately, in this particular case, there were witnesses to counter Birk's characterizations. In many instances when police officers kill, only the officer and the deceased are present.

• Inquests are not criminal trials, yet they employ as much chicanery and as many attempts to conceal as a criminal trial. I read, with curiosity, the attempts by Birk's lawyer to suppress Birk's very obvious self-contradictions immediately after he shot Williams. Such trickery is par for the course in criminal trials — as a former defense attorney, I recognize that generally a dearth of information is good news for my client.
However, these inquests are supposed to be transparent, and meant to reassure civilian psyches that peace officers operate under the law. Yet, when the police officer seeks to block the free flow of information, one reasonably wonders if transparency or true fact-finding is really the goal.

• The largest point is that we cannot fully celebrate because this "victory" does not exist in a vacuum. Seattle Police Department inquests have a 40-year history of not holding police officers accountable. Therefore, this one "victory" is not a panacea and certainly does not stand for the proposition that the inquest process is suddenly right. It is not right.

We should call this what it is: The Birk inquest is the perfect storm of dashboard cams, broad daylight and honest witnesses, combined with discerning jurors, that all conspired together to narrowly show, momentarily, that officers are not infallible. It is nothing more and nothing less.

I cannot assign the Birk inquest more value than it deserves. It is good — thank you, jurors.

Still, inquests need more inquiry, more criticism, and very possibly a U.S. Department of Justice investigation to bring its purported mission in line with its actual administration. Then, perhaps, we can celebrate.

Gyasi Ross, a Seattle lawyer, is a member of the Blackfeet Nation, a former Seattle public defender and a former member of the Seattle Human Rights Commission.

[Pam]

Seattle Police Department inquests have a 40-year history of not holding police officers accountable.

Is the family planning a civil suit if charges aren't brought against the policeman?

[gazhekwe]

I believe they are already in federal court over the civil rights issues. Meantime, I find it very interesting that this case is bringing so much pressure to bear on the police department. From the recent history and some of the tactics employed against the family and witnesses alleged in this case, it is about time. It could be a blueprint for action in any community with policing issues. The Seattle Times seems to be on board with reforms in the PD.

I ran into a young man here in Detroit sporting a 4 Seconds to Death t-shirt.

[gazhekwe]

How the Old Man Made People


Native American Lore

Long ago, when the world was new, there was no one living in it at all, except the Old Man, Na-pe, and his sometimes-friend and sometimes-enemy A-pe'si, the Coyote, and a few buffalo. There were no other people and no other animals. But the Old Man changed all that. He changed it first because he was lonely, and then because he was lazy; and maybe be shouldn't have, but anyway, he did. And this was the way of it.

Na-pe was sitting by his fire one day, trying to think of some way to amuse himself. He had plenty to eat--a whole young buffalo; no need to go hunting. He had a lodge; no work to do; and a fire. He was comfortable, but he wasn't contented. His only companion, A-pe'si the Coyote, was off somewhere on some scheme of his own, and anyway he had quarrelled with A-pe'si, and they were on bad terms; so even if he had been there, Old Man would still have been lonely. He poked some sticks in the fire, threw a rock or two in the river, Lit his pipe, and walked around. . . then sat down, and thought how nice it would be to have someone to smoke with, and to talk to. "Another one, like me," he thought. And he poked some more sticks in the fire, and threw some more rocks in the river.

Then he thought, "Why not? I am the Old Man! I can make anything I want to. Why shouldn't I make another like me, and have a companion?" And he promptly went to work.

First, he found a little still pool of water, and looked at his reflection carefully, so as to know just what he wanted to make. Then he counted his bones as best he could, and felt the shape of them.

Next, he went and got some clay, modelled a lot of bones, and baked them in his fire. When they were all baked, he took them out and looked at them. Some of them were very good, but others were crooked, or too thin, or had broken in the baking. These he put aside in a little heap.

Then he began to assemble the best of the clay bones into a figure of a man. He tied them all together with buffalo sinews, and smoothed them all carefully with buffalo fat. He padded them with clay mixed with buffalo blood, and stretched over the whole thing skin taken from the inside of the buffalo. Then he sat down and lit his pipe again.

He looked at the man he had made rather critically. It wasn't exactly what he had wanted, but still it was better than nothing.

"I will make some more," said Na-pe.

He picked the new man up and blew smoke into his eyes, nose, and mouth, and the figure came to life. Na-pe sat him down by the fire, and handed him the pipe. Then he went to get more clay.

All day long Na-pe worked, making men. It took a long time, because some of the bones in each lot weren't good, and he must discard them and make others. But at last he got seveal men, all sitting by the fire and passing the pipe around. Na-pe sat down with them, and was very happy. He left the heap of discarded bones where they were, at the doorway of his lodge.

So Na-pe and the men lived in his camp, and the men learned to hunt, and Na-pe had company, someone to smoke with, and they were all quite contented.

But the heap of left-over bones was a nuisance. Every time one of the men went in or out of Na-pe's lodge, they tripped over the bones. The wind blew through them at night, making a dreadful noise. The bones frequently tumbled over, making more of a disturbance. Na-pe intended to throw them in the river, but he was a bit lazy, and never got around to it. So the left-over bones stayed where they were.

By this time A-pe'si, the Coyote, was back from wherever he had been. He went around the camp, looking the men over, and being very superior, saying that he didn't think much of Na-pe's handiwork. He was also critical of the heap of bones at the door of the lodge. "I should think you would do something with them--make them into men," said A-pe'si, the Coyote.

"All right, I will," said Na-pe. "Only they aren't very good. It will be difficult to make men out of them!" "Oh, I'll help, I'll help!" said A-pe'si. "With my cleverness, we will make something much better than these poor creatures of yours!" So the two of them set to work. The discarded bones, clicking and tattling, were sorted out, and tied together. Then Na-pe mixed the clay and the buffalo blood to cover them. He fully intended to make the bones into men, but A-pe'si the Coyote kept interfering; consequently, when the job was done, the finished product was quite different. Na-pe surveyed it dubiously, but he blew the smoke into its eyes and nose and mouth, as he had with the men. And the woman came to life.

A-pe'si and Na-pe made the rest of the bones into women, and as they finished each one they put them all together, and the women immediately began to talk to each other. A-pe'si was very pleased with what he had done. "When I made my men," said Na-pe, "I set them down by the fire to smoke."

And even to this day, if you have one group of men, and another of women, the men will want to sit by the fire and smoke. But the women talk. And whether it is because they were made out of the left-over bones that clicked and rattled, or whether it is because A-pe'si, the Coyote --who is a noisy creature himself--had a part in their making, no one can say.

[gazhekwe]

The Seattle Police Department withheld the release of an e-mail written to Chief John Diaz by City Councilman Tim Burgess urging an outside agency be brought in to investigate the officer-involved shooting of woodcarver John T. Williams.
By Mike Carter Seattle Times staff reporter

The Seattle Police Department withheld the release of an e-mail written to Chief John Diaz by a City Council member who urged that an outside agency be brought in to investigate last summer's officer-involved shooting of a First Nations woodcarver.

The e-mail from Tim Burgess was not included in 75 pages of documents released by the Police Department in response to a Seattle Times request for correspondence related to the shooting of John T. Williams by Officer Ian Birk. The request was filed Sept. 8, nine days after the shooting, under the state's Public Disclosure Act.
The Times obtained the e-mail last week through a public-disclosure request to the City Council.

Last year, the department was fined $70,000 for violating public-disclosure laws for trying to prevent the release of investigative documents in an unrelated case involving allegations of excessive use of force by an off-duty officer.

In addition, the department is facing increasing criticism over several recent incidents involving police use of force, which have also sparked a U.S. Justice Department review.

In the Burgess e-mail, written two days after Williams was shot, the council member urges Diaz to bring in an outside agency to join the Police Department in investigating the shooting of Williams to "dispel a further erosion of the public's confidence in our officers."

"I realize that such a step is not common, but it would be a powerful statement about the department's willingness to have its work double-checked and it would provide a level of transparency I believe the public wants," wrote Burgess, a former Seattle police officer who heads the council's Public Safety and Education Committee.

The Williams shooting has not been investigated by an outside agency but was the subject of a recent inquest.

It is unclear why the department did not release the e-mail to The Times. The Police Department has since said its initial response to the disclosure request was "incomplete," and that additional documents "were being gathered and would be forthcoming."

The Times has asked to interview Diaz about the e-mail, but department spokesman Sgt. Sean Whitcomb said the department would not comment.

Public-disclosure fine
In August, the department was fined $70,000 by a King County Superior Court judge for violating public-disclosure laws in a civil case brought by two former U.S. attorneys who are representing a man who claims he was threatened by an off-duty officer.

Brothers Mike and John McKay, now in private practice, released a letter accusing Diaz and the department of engaging in a "full-blown cover-up" by trying to prevent the release of documents relating to a claim filed on behalf of a 19-year-old man who says he was threatened with a gun during a 2009 road-rage incident.

The McKays sent the letter to current U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan on Jan. 12 in support of a call by the American Civil Liberties Union and 34 community groups for the Department of Justice to open a civil-rights investigation into the department. Durkan on Monday announced that the Justice Department would conduct a preliminary review of the allegations.

After the Aug. 30 shooting of Williams, The Times had sought to review comments sent to the Police Department from citizens and advocacy groups. The Sept. 8 public-disclosure request asked for, among other things, "letters, e-mails, documents or other communications" sent to Diaz or his command staff from the office of Mayor Mike McGinn or members of the City Council.

The Police Department initially refused to release any documents, rejecting the initial request on Sept. 14 and an appeal on Sept. 30. The chief and department lawyers argued that the documents were part of the ongoing investigation and contained privileged information "essential to law enforcement."

The Times took the issue to the Seattle City Attorney's Office, whose lawyers met with the department's attorneys. Holmes said he "reached out directly" to Diaz and contacted McGinn's office on Dec. 3.

Holmes said in a later e-mail to The Times that he could not disclose the legal advice he offered. However, that same afternoon the Police Department contacted The Times saying it would release "almost all" of the documents sought by the newspaper.
The documents were delivered Dec. 14 with a cover letter signed for Diaz by Police Department attorney Shawna Skjonsberg-Fotopoulos, saying that some pages contained redactions for privacy reasons and that "three pages are being withheld as it is a witness statement."

It contained no indication that any other documents were being withheld.
The documents the department did provide included letters from a number of community groups and citizens, most expressing concern and criticism over the Williams shooting.

Other requests made
After receiving the department's response, The Times filed similar public-disclosure requests with the mayor and City Council for documents and e-mails sent to Diaz or his assistant chiefs relating to the Williams case.

Last week, the council turned over documents — including the e-mail sent by Burgess to the chief the day after the Williams shooting — that had not been included in the Police Department's response.

The state Public Records Act requires state agencies to make most of their records available to the public, although there are numerous exemptions. The state Supreme Court has said that, even if a document is exempt from release, an agency still must disclose that it exists.

McGinn's office, asked for comment, said in a written statement: "We expect the police department to fully comply with the Public Records Act."

The subject of the Burgess e-mail is "Public Confidence and Transparency," and Burgess tells Diaz he's disturbed about a "growing concern among citizens in Seattle about officer behavior."

Before Williams was shot, the department had come under scrutiny for several incidents involving the use of force by officers, including one where a detective was videotaped stomping on a prone Latino man suspected in a Westlake-area robbery and threatened to "beat the Mexican piss" out of him. Another video showed an officer slugging a teenage girl who was trying to interfere with a jaywalking arrest on Rainier Avenue South.

"I want to encourage you to take specific actions that will dispel a further erosion of the public's confidence in our officers," Burgess wrote. "Nipping this in the bud is important for our city and for our officers."

One reassuring step, Burgess said, would be for Diaz to ask an outside law-enforcement agency to join SPD detectives in the Williams investigation, and present their findings to the prosecutor at the same time as the department's homicide investigators.

"This will not be easy," wrote Burgess. "You will face sharp internal criticism, but I believe our officers will come to a deep appreciation of your actions once they see the results."

A week after the e-mail was sent, Burgess made a more modest call for the department to accept an "outside review" of the department's investigation. Diaz said he had no issue with a peer review, but added: "I'm confident in that the investigations we do are transparent and detailed."

Burgess, contacted Thursday, declined to comment. "My e-mail speaks for itself," he said.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...letter28m.html

[gazhekwe]

Turn up your speakers nice and loud!

Here is the Gold Standard, Northern Cree with War Cry:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HE2cu...eature=related

And Driving me Crazy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwsSqiHoUlI

[gazhekwe]

And here's one from the Grammy nominated Bear Creek Singers from the Soo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKQ7s...13723AF3D102DC

One more http://www.youtube.com/v/RJM1wkiKVZM?fs=1&hl=en_US

[gazhekwe]

http://www.thestranger.com/slog/arch...-crime-meeting

Summary: The Chief spoke at a limited attendance community meeting. After a 10 Minute speech, he took questions for an hour, the bulk of which had to do with the shooting of John T. Williams. Many wondered why Birk is still a police officer, and why Officer Pomper, whose anti-management, anti-minority rants in the Guild News have created a stir, is still carrying a gun on the streets of Seattle. Diaz answered that Birk's discipline will depend upon what happens with the Prosecutor and the Firearms Review Board in the next month or so. He offered no opinion of the outcome either way.

Pomper, he said, is exercising his freedom of speech on his own time, but Diaz came right out and said it was a bad idea, and bad for the SPD for him to air his negative opinions. Should it translate to action on the job, he will be dealt with.

[gazhekwe]

U.S. Attorney: Feds will take a 'very deep dive' into Seattle Police practices

By LEVI PULKKINEN
SEATTLEPI.COM STAFF


Justice Department officials will "take a very deep dive" into use-of-force issues that have arisen with the Seattle Police Department, U.S. Attorney for Western Washington Jenny Durkan said Friday.

Following a string of highly publicized incidents involving Seattle police, culminating with the fatal shooting of a homeless woodcarver in August, several community organizations had asked for a Justice Department investigation into the department's practices.

Speaking with reporters on another matter Friday, Durkan said her office will be meeting with city officials and others beginning next month as part of an inquiry that she described as having begun well before the shooting of John T. Williams.

As she had previously, Durkan said the initial inquiry is aimed at determining whether a larger investigation is appropriate. She noted that the Justice Department routinely monitors police departments for "color of law" violations -- instances where legal authority is used for unlawful ends -- and described the more upcoming meetings and inquiry as an extension of that role.

"We really want to see what is out there," Durkan said Friday.

"We're going to take a deep dive into a number of issues," she continued.

A series of events that cast a department in a bad light can be a fluke, Durkan said. It can also be a sign of systematic problems.

Durkan also acknowledged that the sting of incidents in which Seattle officers were caught on video in violent altercations with residents -- nearly all minority residents -- has hurt the department's credibility.

"Police can't do their job unless they have the trust of the community," Durkan said. "That's their passport."

"At some point," she continued, "the questions become so great they can compromise that trust."

Durkan said she believes an inquiry will lay those questions to rest.

In the past year, Seattle police officers have been involved in several violent incidents that were caught on tape and drew public scrutiny. The incidents included:

• On Oct. 18, a 10-year department veteran kicked a teen following a foot pursuit, as he appeared to be cooperating with the officer. The officer was on administrative reassignment.
• On Aug. 30, Officer Ian Birk fatally shot John T. Williams to death at Boren Avenue and Howell Street. Williams, a Native American carver, was carrying a knife at the time, though an inquest failed to determine whether he posed a threat to Birk.
• On June 14, officer Ian Walsh was videotaped punching a 17-year-old girl in the face after a jaywalking stop took a violent turn. Walsh was cleared in the incident, the 17-year-old apologized, and the 19-year-old was sentenced to community service for obstructing a police officer.
• On April 17, Gang Unit Detective Shandy Cobane and another officer were videotaped stomping on a man detained during a robbery investigation and later released. Cobane said he would "beat the [[expletive) Mexican piss" out of the suspect.
• Durkan said the Justice Department will be looking at the "totality of the circumstances" surrounding each incident. She added that the Seattle City Council and police department leadership had asked that a review be conducted.

[gazhekwe]

A Dakota Midwestern Story related by Joseph Bruchac in Keepers of the Earth

It was the time of falling leaves. Turtle was walking around when he saw many birds gathering in the trees. They were making a lot of noise. Turtle was curious.

"Hey," called Turtle. "What is happening?"

"Don't you know?" replied the birds. "We're getting ready to fly south for the winter?"

"Why are you going to do that?" Turtle asked.

"Don't you know anything?" said the birds. "Soon it will be very cold here and the snow will start falling. All the food will be covered up and hard to find. Down south it will be warm. Summer lives there all year long and there is lots of food."

As soon as they mentioned food, Turtle became even more interested.. "That sounds really good. Can I come with you?"

"You have to fly to go south all that way," the birds told him. "You are a turtle and you can't fly."

But Turtle would not take no for an answer. He begged and pleaded. "I would so love to go, isn't there some way you could take me along?"

Finally the birds agreed just to get him to stop asking.

"Look here," they said, "can you hold onto a stick really hard with your mouth?"

""That's easy," said Turtle. "My jaws are very strong, and once I grab onto something with my mouth, nothing will make me let go until I am ready.":

"Good,": said the birds. "Here is a good strong stick. You grab onto it with your jaws, and these two birds will each take an end and carry you with us a we fly south. But remember, you can't ever open your mouth!"

"That's easy!" said Turtle. "Now let's get to where Summer keeps all that food!"

Turtle grabbed the middle of the stick, and two big strong birds each grabbed an end with their claws. They flapped hard and eventually got up into the air with Turtle hanging from his stick between them. Soon they were high in the sky and heading south.

Turtle had never been so high in the air before, and he liked it. He could look below and see how small everything looked. Soon Turtle became curious. He wanted to know where they were, how far they had come and how far they still had to go to get to where Summer was. He wanted to know many more things, what was that lake, and those hills. He wanted to ask the two birds carrying him, but he couldn't talk with his mouth closed.

He rolled his eyes, but the two birds just kept on flying. He began waving his legs at them, but they just ignored him and kept flying. Turtle was getting annoyed. The least they could do was tell him where they were!

"MMMMMPH!" said Turtle. It didn't work. The two birds kept flying. Finally Turtle lost his temper.

"Why don't you listen to ....." But that was all he said, for the second he opened his mouth to speak, he let go of the stick and started to fall. Down and down he fell, a long, long way down. He was so frightened, he pulled his head and legs in to protect himself, but he was sure he would be killed.

When he hit the ground, he hit so hard that his shell cracked. He was lucky that he hadn't been killed, but he ached all over. He felt so bad that he crawled into a nearby pond, swam to the bottom and buried himself in the mud at the bottom to get as far away from the sky as possible. Then he fell asleep, and he slept all winter and didn't wake up until Spring.

And that is why only birds fly south where Summer lives, and turtles, who all have cracked shells now, sleep under the mud until Spring.

[gazhekwe]

"The Two Jeebi-ug"

[Chippewa]

There lived a hunter in the North who had a wife and one child. His lodge stood far off in the forest, several days' journey from any other. He spent his days in hunting and his evening in relating to his wife the incidents that had befallen him. As game was very abundant he found no difficulty in killing as much as they wanted. Just in all his acts, he lived a peaceful and happy life.

One evening during the winter season, it chanced that he remained out later than usual, and his wife began to feel uneasy, for fear some accident had befallen him. It was already dark. She listened attentively and at last heard the sound of approaching footsteps. Not doubting it was her husband, she went to the door and beheld two strange females. She bade them to enter, and invited them to remain.

She observed that they were total strangers in the country. There was something so peculiar in their looks, air, and manner that she was uneasy in their company. They would not come near the fire; they sat in a remote part of the lodge, were shy and taciturn, and drew their garments around them in such a manner as nearly to hide their faces. So far as she could judge, they were pale, hollow-eyed, and long-visaged, very thin and emaciated. There was but little light in the lodge, as the fire was low, and served by it's fitful flashes rather to increase than dispel their fears.

"Merciful spirit!" cried a voice from the opposite part of the lodge, "there are two corpses clothed with garments."

The hunter's wife turned around, but seeing nobody, she concluded the sounds were but gusts of wind. she trembled, and was ready to sink to the earth.

Her husband at this moment entered and dispelled her fears. He threw down the carcass of a large fat deer.

"Behold what a fine and fat animal," cried the mysterious females, and they immediately ran and pulled off pieces of the whitest fat, which they ate with greediness.

The hunter and his wife looked on with astonishment, but remained silent. They supposed their guests might have been famished. Next day, however, the same unusual conduct was repeated. The strange females tore off the fat and devoured it with eagerness. The third day the hunter thought he would anticipate their wants by tying up a portion of the fattest pieces for them, which he placed on the top of his load. They accepted it, but still appeared dissatisfied, and went to the wife's portion and tore off more.

The man and his wife felt surprised at such rude and unaccountable conduct, but they remained silent, for they respected their guests, and had observed that they had been attended with marked good luck during the residence of these mysterious visitors.
In other respects the deportment of the females was strictly unexceptionable. They were modest, distant, and silent. They never uttered a word during the day. At night they would occupy themselves in procuring wood, which they carried to the lodge, and then, returning the implements exactly to the places in which they had found them, resume their places without speaking. They were never known to stay out until daylight. They never laughed or jested.

The winter had nearly passed away, without anything uncommon happening, when, one evening, the hunter stayed out very late. The moment he entered and laid down his day's hunt as usual before his wife, the two females began to tear off the fat, in so unceremonious a way that her anger was excited. She constrained herself, however, in a measure, but did not conceal her feelings, although she said but little. The guests observed the excited state of her mind, and became unusually reserved and uneasy. The good hunter saw the change, and carefully inquired into the cause, but his wife denied having used any hard words. They retired to their couches, and he tried to compose himself to sleep, but could not, for the sobs and the sighs of the two females were incessant.

He arose on his couch and addressed them as follows:

"Tell me," said he, "What is it that gives you pain of mind, and causes you to utter those sighs. Has my wife given you offense, or trespassed on the rights of hospitality?"

They replied in the negative. "We have been treated by you with kindness and affection. It is not for any slight we have received that we weep. Our mission is not to you only. We come from the land of the dead to test mankind, and to try the sincerity of the living. Often we have heard the bereaved by death say that if the dead could be restored, they would devote their lives to make them happy. We have been moved by the bitter lamentations which have reached the place of the dead and have come to make proof of the sincerity of those who have lost friends. Three moons were alloted us by the Master of Life to make the trial. More than half of the time has been successfully passed when the angry feeling of your wife indicated the irksomeness you felt at our presence, and has made us resolve on our departure."

They continued to talk to the hunter and his wife, gave them instructions as to a future life, and pronounced a blessing upon them.



"There is one point," they added, "of which we wish to speak. You have thought our conduct very strange in rudely possessing ourselves of the choicest parts of your hunt. That was the point of the trial selected to put you to. It is the wife's peculiar privilge. For another to usurp it, we knew to be the severest trial of her, and consequently of your temper and feelings. We know your manners and customs, but we came to prove you, not by a compliance with them, but by a violation of them. Pardon us. We are the agents of him who sent us. Peace to your dwelling, adieu!"


When they ceased, total darkness filled the lodge. No objects could be seen. The inmates heard the door open and shut, but they never saw more of two jeebi-ug.
The hunter found the success which they had promised. He became celebrated in the chase, and never wanted for anything. He had many children, all of who grew up to manhood; and health, peace and long life were the rewards of his hospitality.

[Pam]

Gaz I started a thread on this on the front page. These sessions might be of interest to you.

http://www.hsmichigan.org/meetings.php

Michigan in Perspective: The Local History Conference

March 25-26, 2011
Michigan State University Management Center, Troy

A Hidden History: Native Americans in Southwest Detroit


Late Woodland Burial Mounds and Cemeteries in the Detroit Area

[gazhekwe]

Thanks for the heads up on this, Pam, very interesting topics! It makes me think of the Indian history of this place. We have a lot of symbols in our artwork that crosses between the Six Nations and the Three Fires. I found this comprehensive piece on Mohawk Symbolism. There are a lot of parallels with the Three Fires: The Turtle, the Tall Tree, the Underwater spirits, the underwater panther.

Mohawk Symbols

Haudenosaunee designs have featured recurring designs for centuries; these symbols have been passed on through generations, and have deep cultural significance.

The Tree of Peace is a tall white pine that has been planted by the Onondaga, representing the great binding law, or Gayanahsagowa, which unified the five Nations.

The cardinal points for north, south, east, and west are represented by four white roots growing from the Tree of Peace. The number four has great significance in Haudenosaunee lore, also representing the four beings who help the Creator, and the four winds that blow.

An eagle sits atop the tree of peace, watching over the five Nations, ready to cry out at the first sign of approaching danger. The eagle is considered to be a messenger sent by the Creator.

The next symbol is that of a circle, representing unity and the cycle of life. According to Haudenosaunee lore, the Peace Maker made the Iroquois chiefs gather around the Tree of Peace, forming a circle by holding hands in order to keep the peace.

The next symbol is a bundle of five arrows, each representing one of the five founding tribes of the Iroquois League. The Peace Maker demonstrated that one arrow could easily be broken, while a bundle five would remain strong.

All life is believed to have come from the Sky World, which is represented as a dome, or arch.

In addition to the Tree of Peace, the Haudenosaunee often make references to the Celestial Tree, from which all lights in the Sky World originate.

The Earth itself is represented by Turtle Island a giant turtle whose carapace features thirteen plates, each of which represent one of thirteen moons that make up an entire year. North-America [[Mother Earth) is often represented as a turtle.

The dark side of Haudenosaunee lore is known as The Underworld, and it is represented by [[amongst other things) snakes, and a horned panther with a long serpentine tail which lives underwater in the Great Lakes.

[gazhekwe]

http://www.sootoday.com/content/news...ryNumber=49733 [[includes music clip)

BEAR CREEK

*************************
Bear Creek, an Ojibwe drum group based out of Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, has been nominated for the Best Native American Music Album in the American Roots Genre at the 53rd Annual Grammy Awards.

The Bear Creek Singers include Michael Tegosh, Joe Syrette, Justin Perrault, Kevin Syrette, Nicholas Hewson, Andrew Nahwegahbow, Robert Essex, John Syrette, Mike Willis, Nitanis Kit Landry, Gabe Gaudet, Elijah Stevens, Dan Isaac, Dan Jackson, Nathan Isaac and Wayne Silas.

The title of the album, available through Canyon Records, is XI.

The album was recorded live at the San Manuel Powwow in California in October of 2009.

Bear Creek’s membership includes singers from the Batchewana, Garden River, Aundeck Omni Kaning, Aamjiwnaang, Moose Cree, Serpent River and Whitefish Lake First Nations in Ontario and the Bay Mills Indian Community in Michigan

Best Native American Music Album nominations

XI - Bear Creek

Temptations: Cree Round Dance Songs - Northern Cree

Woodnotes Wyld: Historic Flute Sounds From The Dr. Richard

W. Payne Collection - Peter Phippen

2010 Gathering Of Nations Pow Wow: A Spirit's Dance - [[Various Artists)


Bear Creek heads to Grammys

By Brian Kelly, The Sault Star

Updated 2 days ago

Now the members of Bear Creek can relax and savour what they've accomplished.
The aboriginal drum group, with members from several communities including Garden River, Batchewana, Serpent River and Sarnia [and Bay Mills and the Soo], headed south Thursday to attend the 53rd annual Grammy Awards in Los Angeles on Sunday.

Bear Creek earned a Best Native American Music Album nomination for their live disc, XI.
Members were initially ecstatic when they learned about the impressive nod in early December.

Then, they started to add up how much it would actually cost to attend the high profile music awards ceremony.

"It wasn't so much thinking about the glamourous side of it anymore," said Kevin Syrette before driving to Detroit to catch his flight Thursday.

"It was about raising the funds now that it's a reality."

Bear Creek, formed in 1998, was alloted just one free ticket for its 14 members.
Finding, and buying, additional seats, priced at $300 and $600 each, booking flights and hotel rooms started to add up to a substantial pile of cash.

Several First Nation communities, businesses and a pub held at Garden River Community Centre Friday, raised $21,000 to cover the band's expenses.

"The support has just been amazing," said Syrette, noting well-wishers from Detroit, Sarnia, Walpole Island and Sudbury attended last week's fundraiser.

"A lot of people travelled here just to support us that one night. It doesn't go unrecognized by us."

Ten will attend. Four couldn't because of work and other commitments.

"It's not like we're going to struggle down there," said Syrette. "We're going to have a good trip."

The group's co-founder says he will "take it all in" during the weekend ceremony.

"That old cliche, just happy to be nominated, but it's true," said Syrette. "It's an honour in itself. No one can ever take that from us. We will always be Grammy nominated."

The recognition from National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences of the United States is already paying off. Bear Creek would usually take until about May to be booked for performances at summer pow wows. This year, their calendar filled up by February.

"Our bookings have picked up from last year," said Syrette. "This year it just seems that a lot of different places that we've never been before [[want us to play)."

He has done interviews for media outlets in Washington and Arizona. Interested music buyers quickly snapped up a box of Bear Creek CDs Syrette kept in his truck during the past month.

A fan page on Facebook boasts more than 6,000 members.

Don't expect any paparazzi shots of Bear Creek to showcase how good Syrette and his fellow musicians look in tuxedos.

They will "dress as nice as we can" without donning such formal dress.

"We decided not to stick out like penguins because we noticed no one else does," said Syrette.

On the web: www.grammy.com

[gazhekwe]

Reported Live from the Grammys by Phyllis Pollack
While backstage, holding the Grammy award for the category of Best Native American Music Album for their recording "2010 Gathering of Donations Pow Wow: A Spirits Dance," Derek Matthews, Dr. Lita Matthews and Melonie Matthews expressed their love for Native American Music.
Backstage at the Grammys, Examiner.com asked the three family members who produced the Grammy-winning recording about the large extent of social consciousness expressed on the album.
Derek Matthews told Examiner.com, "The album is socially conscious because it is very spiritual. The event [[the Pow Wow at which the album was recorded) is spiritual. The first inhabitants of the land were Native Americans. The land where Staples Center is was likely inhabited by its original owners, the Native People. Over 652 tribes in the Native American community came together. Each tribe has something different from the other. The people are expressing their pride in the culture and the existence of their way of life."
Matthews also discussed the drum groups heard on the album, adding, "This year, it was all about the drums, it was all about the songs, it was all about the voices."
He noted, "When we sat down with this, we had over 200 songs and we broke it down to 19 songs."
Describing the music heard on the album, which was recorded at the largest Native American Pow Wow in the country, "This is the rock and roll, this is the hip hop, this is the blues, this is the soul of Native Americans."
The 53rd Annual Grammy Awards are ensuing on Sunday, Feb. 13, 2011, from Staples Center in Los Angeles, and will be broadcast live in high-definition TV and 5.1 surround sound on CBS from 8 – 11:30 p.m. [[ET/PT).

Continue reading on Examiner.com: Live backstage at the Grammys: Native American music - National rock music | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/rock-music-i...#ixzz1DtYAmbTo

[gazhekwe]

David Kimelberg

CEO of Seneca Holdings LLC
Posted: February 10, 2011 04:50 P




The Last Acceptable Racism: Native Americans



Two disturbing developments recently hit my radar. The first was an announcement from Washington's NFL team that it's planning to change its name and logo. Okay, that seems innocuous enough. Washington Politicos? Nope. The new name is the Washington Jews. The re-worked logo is equally alarming: it consists of a profile of what appears to be a stereotyped Jewish person, complete with the physical features exploited by Sasha Baron Cohen in his film Borat.

The second was the results of a New Yorker cartoon caption contest. Normally a source of great wit and cleverness, this one was just plain distasteful: the cartoon pictured an SS guard taking cover behind a desk against a barrage of "throwing stars" clearly in the shape of the Star of David. While avoiding the onslaught of Jewish-themed steel weapons hitting the desk and everything else around him, he's speaking to someone on the phone. In the New Yorker's caption contests, readers are asked to submit witty captions to accompany the cartoon, with winners announced in a subsequent issue. So, what was the winning caption? Get ready, here's the punchline: "Quick, give them the banks." Not only is the caption just not funny, its racist angle is obvious. Has the liberal and renowned New Yorker gone off the deep end?
Shocked by this news? Of course you are. And, of course, they're not true. If they were, both organizations would be dealing with a deluge of warranted criticism and outrage from all corners. What is truly shocking is that Native Americans are subject to analogous assaults and no one seems to care.
Of course, Washington's NFL team is actually the Washington Redskins. The term "redskins" is highly offensive to Native Americans and is equivalent to the "n-word" for African Americans. Not only is the team's name insulting, its logo is also a slap in the face for Natives. It attempts to depict a profile of an "Indian," complete with braids, feathers and a stoic gaze. It's pure stereotyping and nothing more. It perpetuates a caricature of Native people, and is another societal movement to turn Native Americans into a historical footnote, frozen in time as a cowboy western prop, and not allow recognition of us for who we really are. In the category of "irony of all ironies," the Redskins' owner, Dan Snyder, recently sued a Washington news outlet for including a picture of him with devil horns. His complaint? That, as a Jew, the news outlet depicted him in a blatantly anti-Semitic way, which caused him great harm. Really? Can you not see the clear racist parallels with your own NFL franchise, Mr. Snyder?

The New Yorker obviously doesn't get it either. Instead of my theoretical SS guard, a recent New Yorker cartoon caption contest actually depicted a cowboy seeking refuge behind a desk peppered with arrows. The scene includes him on the phone, behind the desk in an office overlooking a cityscape. The New Yorker, the de facto leader of liberal literary intellectualism, decided that the winning caption should be: "Quick, give them a casino." Instead of highbrow wit, the New Yorker decided that lowbrow overt racism should carry the cartoon caption day. The fact that only a couple commentators took issue with this [[all Native Americans) speaks volumes. The message is that racism against Native Americans is acceptable and universally embraced under the guise of alleged humor.
As both a Native American and a Jew, I am equally offended by racist attacks on either group. This type of verbal and pictorial violence has only one goal in mind: to dehumanize the subject group so they're viewed as a subclass not worthy of respect or acknowledgment as a distinct people. Native Americans have suffered the business end of this type of treatment in spades. Our 1492 population was estimated at between 15 and 18 million. As a result of violence and overtly genocidal governmental policies, this number was slashed to 250,000 by 1900. Today's use and furtherance of stereotypical Native American imagery and narrative only serves to keep shameful concepts alive, regardless of whether it's the actual intent. What's more, they remind Native Americans, particularly our youth, that others do not deem us worthy of respect and that our people are merely a historical holdover to be represented by comic book imagery.
A recent New York Times article tells the story of how Native American art collectors have historically identified the source of our artworks by tribe and not individual artists. Only now are museums and collectors beginning to respect and value these works by identifying the individual artists and recognizing their worth as people. Can you imagine if a Monet was just identified as "French"? It's clear that many corners of society view Native Americans as an abstract concept, imbued with normative valuing as a lesser group.
How can racial assaults against Native people be widely accepted, while similar assaults against Jews [[or any other ethnic group) be quickly condemned? The answer is twofold. First, we're small in absolute numbers. We represent only about one percent of the U.S. population. Because we don't have a large population, we are potentially easy prey. Second, our mindset and world view are shaped by centuries of conquest and genocidal policies. We were stripped of our lands, our people were killed and we were herded onto reservations to better allow for forced assimilation. We were portrayed as savages not worthy of recognition as human beings. Not that long ago, white administrators of Indian boarding schools told our children that the "Indian in you shall die." This kind of treatment and forced thinking has a lasting generational effect. It can be difficult to break through that type of programming. Many of our people, however, have shaken off these forced ideological shackles to speak the truth and demand long overdue respect. Our voice is getting louder.
Our words are being said with more frequency and emphasis. But people need to hear us. Societal racism should no longer be an ad hoc affair, which is routinely accepted when directed against a certain group. It should be universally condemned. Perpetuating past wrongs and dehumanizing concepts hurts everyone.

David Kimelberg is an enrolled citizen [[Bear clan) of the Seneca Nation of Indians. He is the CEO of Seneca Holdings LLC, the investment arm of the Seneca Nation, and the founder of nativeinvestment.com, an online forum and blog about economic development in Indian Country. His views are his own and not necessarily those of the Seneca Nation of Indians or Seneca Holdings.

[gazhekwe]

what with the trash value placed upon the life of a person who struggled with life and "caused trouble" by his lifestyle. I am still shocked and disappointed. Those who excuse this killing by calling the victim a chronic inebriate are showing some seriously inhumane ways of thinking.

No charges against Seattle officer who shot woodcarver
King County prosecutors have decided not to file criminal charges against Seattle police Officer Ian Birk in the fatal shooting of woodcarver John T. Williams, according to sources familiar with the decision. Meanwhile, the Police Department has found the shooting unjustified, which could lead to Birk's firing.

By Steve Miletich, Seattle Times staff reporter

King County prosecutors have decided not to file criminal charges against Seattle police Officer Ian Birk in the fatal shooting of woodcarver John T. Williams, according to sources familiar with the decision.
The Prosecutor's Office is expected to announce the decision in a news conference on Wednesday, the sources said.
Shortly after the announcement, Seattle Police Chief John Diaz is expected to hold a news conference, at which he will disclose that the department's Firearms Review Board has reached a final decision that the Aug. 30 shooting was not justified, according to sources who have been briefed on the finding.
The board's conclusion, reached in private deliberations a few days ago, allows the Police Department to begin internal proceedings that could lead to Birk's firing or other discipline, the sources said. In October, the board reached a preliminary decision that the shooting was unjustified, sources said at the time.
Deputy Police Chief Nick Metz said Tuesday he couldn't comment in detail on the department's plans, but said police officials were working on a statement on the course of the case.
Metz said the department was aware that the outcome is a "very sensitive issue" and that the "community is watching closely."
Birk has been on paid administrative leave since the shooting.
The Prosecutor's Office declined Tuesday to discuss its decision.
"Our decision has not been finalized and we will make an official announcement in the near future," said Ian Goodhew, deputy chief of staff for King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg.
Prosecutors have been confronted with a steep legal hurdle in deciding whether to charge Birk with murder or manslaughter. State law shields police officers from criminal prosecution when they claim they used deadly force in self-defense, unless it can be shown they acted with malice and a lack of good faith.
The decision not to file criminal charges comes about a month after a King County inquest jury reached mixed findings on the shooting during a fact-finding proceeding.
Four of eight jurors found that Birk wasn't facing an imminent threat when he fatally shot Williams, and that he didn't give Williams sufficient time to put down a knife he was carrying during their confrontation on a Seattle sidewalk.


One juror found that Birk faced a threat and gave Williams sufficient time, while three others answered "unknown."
Four jurors determined Birk believed he was in danger when he encountered Williams, while four others answered "unknown."
The findings regarding the actual threat to Birk stand in contrast to previous King County inquest decisions, in which jurors have almost always upheld the actions of police officers involved in deadly shootings.
Inquest jurors weren't asked to weigh whether Birk was guilty or innocent of wrongdoing in the shooting.
The results were reviewed by the King County Prosecutor's Office to help determine whether to file criminal charges.
Even before the inquest, Birk, 27, who joined the department in July 2008, had been stripped of his gun and badge as a result of the preliminary finding by the Firearms Review Board and Police Chief John Diaz that the shooting was unjustified, sources said. The board waited to make a final decision until after the inquest.
The board, made up of Deputy Chief Clark Kimerer, two captains and a lieutenant, heard testimony in October from civilian witnesses and police investigators. One member of the board sat in on the inquest. The board determines if officer shootings fall within department policies and procedures. The inquest jury sifted through conflicting testimony and two patrol-car videos and audio that captured some elements of the confrontation at Boren Avenue and Howell Street but not the shooting itself. The jury's answers did not have to be unanimous.
According to evidence presented during the inquest, about four seconds elapsed between the time Birk issued his first order to Williams to put down the knife he was carrying and when the officer opened fire.
The shooting occurred after Birk saw Williams cross the street holding a flat piece of wood and a knife with a 3-inch blade. Williams, a member of Canada's First Nations people, used the knife for carving, according to his family.
Birk got out of his patrol car and followed Williams onto the sidewalk. Birk shouted at Williams to get his attention and ordered him three times to put down the knife. Birk fired when Williams didn't respond, hitting him four times.
Birk testified during the inquest he was initially concerned because Williams showed signs of impairment while carrying a knife. He said when he sought to question Williams, Williams turned toward him with a "very stern, very serious, very confrontational look on his face."
Birk told jurors Williams "still had the knife out and [was in] a very confrontational posture" when he opened fire.
Williams, a chronic inebriate, had a blood-alcohol level measured during his autopsy at 0.18 percent, above the 0.08 percent level at which a driver is considered to be legally drunk.
During the inquest, two witnesses contradicted Birk, saying they didn't see Williams do anything threatening before he was shot.
Birk testified that shortly after the shooting he told a witness, a responding officer and a detective that Williams had not complied with his order to put down the knife. He acknowledged that, at that time, he did not tell them that Williams had threatened him.
It wasn't until hours later, Birk testified, that he provided a detailed written statement alleging that Williams had menacingly displayed the knife and "pre-attack indicators."
Williams' knife was found folded in the closed position after the shooting.
Jurors unanimously found that Williams was carrying an open knife when first seen by Birk. But four answered "no" and four "unknown" when asked if the blade was open when Birk fired.
In reviewing the case, prosecutors had various options: charging Birk with second-degree murder, first-degree reckless manslaughter, second-degree negligent manslaughter, or declining to bring a charge.
A second-degree murder charge would require prosecutors to show beyond a reasonable doubt that Birk intended to unlawfully kill Williams, or that Birk intentionally and unlawfully assaulted Williams, causing his death.
Manslaughter requires less proof. Prosecutors must show only that reckless or negligent conduct caused a death, although they still must do so beyond a reasonable doubt.
Federal prosecutors have been monitoring the case and could consider bringing a criminal civil-rights case against Birk. But they must show willful criminal conduct to obtain a conviction.
An assistant U.S. attorney in Seattle watched some of the inquest proceedings, including Birk's testimony.
The shooting of Williams and other incidents have prompted the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington and 34 community groups to call on the U.S. Justice Department to investigate the Seattle Police Department's practices. Seattle officers have been under scrutiny over allegations of improper use of force in several incidents in the past year, particularly in dealings with minorities.
The Justice Department has since opened a preliminary review of the department.
Information from Seattle Times staff reporter Jennifer Sullivan and Times archives is included in this story.
Steve Miletich: 206-464-3302 or smiletich@seattletimes.com

[Pam]

King County prosecutors have decided not to file criminal charges against Seattle police Officer Ian Birk in the fatal shooting of woodcarver John T. Williams, according to sources familiar with the decision. Meanwhile, the Police Department has found the shooting unjustified, which could lead to Birk's firing.

I don't get it. If it was unjustified, then he should be charged with a crime.