VCNAA Meeting Minutes 2/15/11 (with added commentary)

It’s that time of the month where I critique yet another set of minutes from the biased, fraudulent VCNAA. Original minutes are in the link below with commentary below that as well:

vcnaa_minutes_021511

Commentary starts here:

2. Update on current recognition legislation

Luke gave a briefing on the status of the bills regarding the State Recognition of the Elnu and Nulhegan tribes. The two House bills have passed and crossedover to the Senate.

This was done by a voice vote after the House claimed that they had poured over all of the documentation. I don’t believe it. Neither application should have passed.

Peter Thomas was recognized by the chair. He asked if scholars from the Review Panel would be testifying in regards to pending applications (ie Missisquoi). Luke explained that the legislative committees had taken testimony from Review Panel scholars during the Elnu and Nulhegan committee hearings. Presumably, the committee will do the same with future recommendations.

I assume that both David Lacy and Dave Skinas will not be able to give any more testimony, which makes sense considering what they did.

3. Public records redaction process

After requesting clarity on the process of redacting information that is exempt from the public record (ie Archeological site locations, Genealogy) from recognition applications and reports from the Commission and Scholar Review Panels, legal counsel from the Division for Historic Preservation is helping to develop a process.

When was genealogy made exempt from the public record? These people just do not want anyone pouring over their genealogy because it does not line up with what they are trying to do!

Luke has made it clear to legislators and Historic Preservation that the Commission does not have the resources to perform legal redactions. Luke suggested that the Commission consider adopting a policy that instructs applicants that this information can’t come to us.

He could ask his pal, Mr.Illuzzi, to pull a few strings. Illuzzi’s already at it, helping these people to obscure the truth about themselves.

Dawn mentioned that it would be difficult for us to establish the kinship criteria in our reports without the genealogical references. Luke noted that the Scholar Panels would still be able to access the information and we can reference their responses in our reports.

Fred moved to make it policy from this point on that applications may not include genealogical information that identifies specific living individuals or archaeological site locations. This information may be included in the Expert Review Panel packets.

Only these “review experts” will have access to this information. And, if they are connected to the members of this commission? You can bet your bottom dollar that the public will not hear or see this information.

Nathan suggested that we use the word “must”, rather than “may” in the last sentence. Fred amended his motion to replace “may” with “must”. Takara seconded Fred’s motion. Luke stated the motion with the exact wording, “Applications may not include genealogical information that identifies specific living
individuals or archaeological site locations. This information must be included in a separate packet that only goes to the expert review panelists.” All agreed.

This whole process is comical. Only in the state of Vermont, can you invent a tribe, join a commission and make your own rules. What about transparency in government? Are these people really afraid that others are going to harm them if their genealogical information is out there?

4. Review draft Commission Report re: Koasek of the Koas

Dawn began by noting that the addendum satisfied any concerns from the initial review but voiced a concern about some names and addresses that were not included in the application. Luke mentioned that the Commission has already voted unanimously to recommend recognition of Koasek to the General Assembly. He noted that Nathan had originally brought up the fact thatthere were Koasek members whose names and street addresses were left out for privacy purposes. Luke confirmed it as 17 members and that their Band ID numbers and town/state of residence were listed in the roster to document their existence. This is detailed in the Commission’s draft report to the legislature. Luke asked how we interpret Criterion 4.

Despite the fact that some of the scholars expressed doubt as to the legitimacy of this incorporation (mainly Lacy & Skinas), they approved the application.

This is totally not a surprise at all. Anyone who thought that these people were going to do the right thing, obviously had no clue about their true purpose on this commission.

He mentioned that, fundamentally, the criterion is to establish the existence of the applicant’s “organizational structure” and how the fact that a tribe keeps a detailed census of its members
supports that. He said that although some names were left out for privacy purposes, the Commission was still able to confirm that the applicant maintains a census of its members. Fred mentioned that the criterion did not specify that ‘all’ names and addresses be included. Discussion continued around the purpose and intent of the names and addresses. Nathan voiced
that his concern is that we will set a precedent. Luke mentioned again that we must look at the criteria. We use the names and addresses for two purposes: To establish that a majority of the
applicant’s members currently reside in a specific geographic location within Vermont; and to support that the applicant maintains an organizational structure that exerts influence and
authority over its members. We’ve seen this.

It seems to me like Nathan was right to ask questions. It’s too bad that Luke and Fred aren’t interested in listening. Nope, can’t have Nathan rocking the apple cart.

Chief Nancy Millette-Doucet was recognized. She explained that this particular family would not permit the publishing of their personally identifiable information for reasons of privacy. She
said that Koasek is a tribe, not a dictatorship, and she cannot force them to be public or expelthem from the tribe for exercising their own right to privacy.

It’s not a tribe, it’s an incorporation. The “Queen Bee” makes yet another appearance. The funny thing is, no one has said just who this “family” is.

Nathan said that the law needs to be changed.Luke said that there is definitely a gray area in the law, however, we already voted to unanimously to recommend Koasek for recognition. No one brought this up at the public hearing or any of the other meetings we have had since Koasek’s application was submitted on November 16th of last year. We need to provide a report to the legislature and that is the item at hand. It can be amended to say anything we want but we need to provide the legislature with a report.

Just because no one brought it up, doesn’t mean that there wasn’t opposition to it. Also, who writes these minutes?

Nathan moved to not approve the draft report. No one seconded.

See what I mean? They were going to approve it regardless of what Nathan and others said. This is why this commission should be disbanded.

Fred noted that he is fine with the report because we noted in it that the 17 names were redacted for privacy purposes. We are up front about it in the report and we explain our decision.
Nathan brought up how Chief Roger Longtoe asked about the names and addresses in Newport and we told him that they have to be included. Everyone should have to do the same thing.
Luke said that Koasek did provide names and addresses and that he told Chief Nancy the same thing that he told Chief Roger. Luke said we may be forgetting that Eloise Beil, Bill Haviland,
and David Skinas all provided detailed reports of approval, that include the fourth criterion.

Everyone should do the same thing, unless their name is Nancy Millette-Doucet. See what I mean? I figure, if you’re going to hold one of these groups to a standard, you might as well hold all of them to the same standard.

Nathan brought up that he hadn’t received the tribal rolls until recently. Luke brought up that it is up to Historic Preservation to provide you with handouts if you are absent from a meeting.

Actually, Luke should have copies of these handouts on him at all times. He is the Chair after all.

Takara said that we each have the personal responsibility to request the handout if we don’t have it. All handouts are recorded in the agendas and minutes. Fred said that we drafted this report based upon what we were given. We’ve done our job. Takara said we need to get back to the report and moved to approve the draft report and forward to the legislative committees. Fred seconded. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

After they finish brow-beating Nathan, they decide that it’s more important to get a crock report to the Legislature instead of fleshing out all of the details.

What’s the hurry? You’ll find out below.

5. Missisquoi Application Review

The Commission looked at reports from the Scholar Review Panel (Peter Thomas, Kevin Dann,and Bill Haviland). All were positive. Nathan mentioned that he did not have a copy of the
Missisquoi application because he was absent from the January 19th meeting when they were passed out. Melody has excused herself from the Missiquoi review because she is a former
member and because she is mentioned in the application, so she offered her copy to Nathan.

Dawn had positive remarks about the Missisquoi application but has an issue with the names and addresses because there are people listed who are not members of the tribe anymore. Dave
mentioned that the tribe has procedures that members must file to be removed from the tribe’s rolls. Luke noted that he understands that but having Don Stevens, who is Chief of the Nulhegan Tribe listed, is a conflict. It is common knowledge that Chief Don is no longer a member of Missisquoi. These names conflict with other applications that have already been checked for accuracy. It looks like an older list that just needs some updating. No harm done. We can work with Chief April when she returns from vacation to amend the list. We must do this so that wecan accurately determine the percentage for the first criterion.

Do the Feds know about April’s little vacation? Also, if your family tree is held at the Missisquoi Building on Grand Ave. in Swanton, you may be on the list for Missisquoi. Unless you specifically request to have your records removed, they WILL use it to try and get recognition.

Also, it’s true that Donald Stevens should no longer be on the Missisquoi list. I’ve heard rumblings about how these people “jump” from one incorporation to another in order to try and get recognition.

Nathan said we should look over all information first to make sure it is correct before it is sent to the scholars. Luke said that we can’t do that. The scholars examine information that we’re not even allowed to see. Addenda are forwarded to scholars. Dave said it’s up to the applicants to provide correct information. We can ask for clarity and additional information and send it along to the scholars but our job is to facilitate, review, decide, and report. More discussion followed.

I’m not sure if Nathan is truly ignorant of the processes but I will concede that they seem to be giving him hell just for asking uncomfortable (but very legit) questions.

6. Status of Active Scholar’s List

David Lacy and David Skinas were both given ethics violations by the USDA for using Forest Service and USDA letterhead on their reviews. Luke found this interesting since Mr. Lacy was given permission to conduct his review during work hours and Mr. Skinas has worked with Native American tribes for a long time. He found it even more interesting that chain of
communication in regards to these “violations” originated from the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Identical reviews (minus the letterhead) were provided for our files so that the record would reflect that the federal government does not share the views of their employees. The Commission was less than impressed and even less surprised.

Luke Willard, if you’re reading this blog, then you of all the people should know by now that both Dave Skinas and David Lacy illegally used those letterheads for their respective federal employers in their letters of recommendation. Federal law has established that by writing such letters, it gives the false impression that the agencies on those letterheads ENDORSE these groups, which they obviously do not.

If the part about letters minus the letterheads is correct, then why didn’t the commission submit those letters instead of the letters WITH the letterheads? Something isn’t adding up here and I think that by using the letters with those official-looking letterheads, that the Commission was trying to build “legitimacy”.

Peter Thomas added that BIA should have no interest in State Recognition review panels. Nathan asked if we would be issuing a response. Luke mentioned that our process and the individuals themselves have been harmed by this. Even on personal time, Lacy can’t participate anymore. Nathan asked if they are allowed to volunteer at the local food shelf or anywhere else. Takara said that this is a free country and it was even on their own time. Luke said we didn’t ask the USDA or the Forest Service for anything. Our interest is in the scholar’s experience and education and not their title. Nathan suggested we give the two agencies some extra paper for their time. Luke added that hostility from the feds is nothing new.

Actually, when you misuse Federal letterheads, it becomes the business of the Federal government.

The VCNAA willingly used these recommendation letters with the hopes that they would “legitimize” this whole process.

You know, I just find it funny that these people are just now claiming that the departure of Skinas and Lacy is “harming” them and this process.

Let’s see, they sit on a biased and compromised VCNAA in which each member is intimately connected. They voted to pass on bills to support recognition of their friends. They worked with scholars that have known them for years and would obviously approve their recognition.

They have it easy here. There’s no hard questions being asked. Their genealogy is not being addressed by the State of Vermont. They are practically cruising through without many speed bumps. Well, not anymore.

Who’s really being harmed by this process? Hint: It’s not the Vermont Commission on Native American Affairs!

It’s the Odanak people who reside in Vermont who are being harmed. It’s the people who aren’t part of this Alliance that are being harmed.

People who find this VCNAA to be a complete and utter joke! Right now, the VCNAA has the credibility of tyrants like Gadhafi, Ben Ali and Mubarak!

To the Vermont Commission on Native American Affairs: STOP PLAYING VICTIM HERE!

You are making victims out of people, not the other way around!

Secrecy or Transparency?

Two contrasting dynamics are currently at play in the State of Vermont.

On one hand, we have a proposal from Senator Vince Illuzzi that would actively hide access to public records of groups seeking tribal recognition:

Mr.Illuzzi wants to send a message to yours truly, Mr.Buchholz and Nancy LeCompte that we will not be able to view or copy public records relating to the Alliance groups and their genealogy. This will also apply to any Vermonter who wishes to access such records.

We know by now exactly why Mr.Illuzzi would redact such information:  he must have something in it for him. Why else would he be so eager to hide this information? Who is Mr.Illuzzi trying to protect?

Regardless of what happens, he’s far too late on this. The information is out there and no law will prevent people from knowing the truth.

Which brings me to this fun tidbit concerning transparency in Vermont State Government:

In the famous words of Dwayne Johnson, don’t sing it, BRING IT!

Show us this transparency you speak of! Mr.Shumlin and Mr.Condos must now stand by their words and put a stop to Mr.Illuzzi’s meddling.

You can’t promise something and then not deliver!

Which is it going to be? Secrecy or Transparency?

Koasek Application Exposed (with my commentary)

If you’re like me, you may have not heard of the Koasek of the Koas. Personally, until 2008, I had no clue who they were. Regardless, a link to their application is below with my analysis.

Koasek Application

Comments below:

853 (c)(1) A majority of the applicant’s members currently reside in a specific geographical location within Vermont.

According to the Koasek’s tribal rolls, the majority of the members reside in Vermont.

Vermont “indians” with a chief that resides in NH (Nancy Millette-Doucet). Where have I seen this before? Oh right, Ralph Swett of the Clan of the Hawk, who lives in Florida during the colder months.

Edit: Mr.Swett informed me that he’s back in Vermont right now. Duly noted.

853 (c)(2) A substantial number of the applicant’s members are related to each other by kinship and trace their ancestry to a kinship group through genealogy or other methods. Genealogical documents shall be limited to those that show descendency from identifiedVermont or regional Native people.

Other than some members having the same last name, I did not see where kinship was established. I would suggest a sample of a family tree tracing a name to an ancestor. That would give a clear understanding to those who do not know what names are Abenaki names. (Or use a member who traces themselves to John Battist or Indian Joe for reference)

Even the scholars (including David Lacy!) are unsure about this group. Uh-oh! Strike one?

853 (c)(3) The applicant has a connection with Native American Indian tribes and bands that have historically inhabited Vermont.

There is substantial evidence of interaction between Koasek and the others Bands petitioning for state recognition. I have no doubt that historically natives have lived in that area of Vermont. (I would suggest the date that White Pine Association was established for timeline sake)

See the underlined part. Here on this application, we have scholars openly admitting that they don’t know the timeline of these people. They want the date that the WPA website was established for a timeline.

853 (c)(4) The applicant has historically maintained an organizational structure that exerts influence and authority over its members that is supported by documentation of the structure, membership criteria, the names and residential addresses of its members, and the methods by which the applicant conducts its affairs.

The band has included its constitution (which should show the date that it was accepted by members). It also includes the membership criteria. (I’m still uncomfortable with the use of DNA but that’s just a personal opinion.)

I can certainly understand why the use of DNA would make the scholars uncomfortable.  Unlike an indian tribe or family history, you cannot fake your DNA. It simply does not lie. You should embrace who you are, rather than hiding from it by creating a false identity.

853 (c)(5) The applicant has an enduring community presence within the boundaries of Vermont that is documented by archaeology, ethnography, physical anthropology, history, folklore, or any other applicable scholarly research and data.

The Connecticut River valley has been home to Natives peoples for over 11,000 years inhabiting areas near what is now modern day Newbury, VT, and south to the White River valley. There is archaeological evidence of Native villages throughout this area.

Ok. And? Please tell us which native people you’re referring to. Making such a broad statement leaves too much room for false interpretations.

I scanned through the rest of the information, which is used to create a historical basis for these people. It was similar to the information presented in other applications. Standard scholarly stuff.

However, this line stood out because it ties in with a line at the beginning of the application:

There is recorded evidence that Newbury resident and Native John Battist later moved from the Newbury area to the upper Coos, Indicating that the Native peoples of Vermont settled in many different areas therefore creating kinship between tribes

The line I’m talking about is here:

Other than some members having the same last name, I did not see where kinship was established. I would suggest a sample of a family tree tracing a name to an ancestor. That would give a clear understanding to those who do not know what names are Abenaki names. (Or use a member who traces themselves to John Battist or Indian Joe for reference)

The line above the last does not make sense anymore. How can the “native peoples” of this area create a kinship when there’s a lack of any evidence (sample of a family tree) to trace a name to an ancestor? I’m not sure if I’ve got it right but basically, there’s a contradiction here between what the scholars claim and what the history claims.

Which is which? Do they or do they not have a kinship with John Battist?

853 (c)(6)(A) The applicant is organized in part: to preserve, document, and promote its Native American Indian culture and history, and this purpose is reflected in its bylaws.

The Koasek have formed a non-profit organization called the White Pine Association, which is dedicated to the preservation of the history, culture, and language of the Abenaki people.

The organization in point has a website here:

http://www.whitepineassociation.org/

Granted, having a constitution and a website does not make a group a tribe. More to come on this website.

853 (c)(6)(B) The applicant is organized in part: to address the social, economic, political or cultural needs of the members with ongoing educational programs and activities.

The social and cultural programming of the Koasek primarily centers on Nawhila and it’s auxiliary organization, the White Pines Association. Nawhila is a Native American cultural weekend and powwow.

As with the Missisquoi, Clan of the Hawk and Nulhegan groups, a pow-wow/cultural weekend is standard operating procedure. Granted, pow-wows can be fun and educational. They can also be used to reinforce false identities.

853 (c)(7) The applicant can document traditions, customs, oral stories, and histories that signify the applicant’s Native American heritage and connection to their historical homeland.

In the application they have provided the traditions they follow, they also listed customs they still practice today, using white suckers for fertilizer. The Koasek oral stories focus around the 17th and 18th centuries in the viable Indian community.

Another mistake in this application: Where is this information? Is there some other application that they have filled out? It just seems like sloppy editing to refer to an application in the 3rd person sense. Again, too vague for my liking.

853 (c)(8) The applicant has not been recognized as a tribe in any other state, province, or nation.

The Koasek have not been recognized by any state or federal governments.

And I doubt they would be in any other state. But then again, this is just my opinion.

853 (c)(9)(A) Submission of letters, statements, and documents from: municipal, state, or federal authorities that document the applicant’s history of tribe-related business and activities.

The Koasek have many supporting letters from state and federal officials: Dave Skinas, USDA; Catherine Brooks, VT Cultural Heritage Coordinator; VT Senator Hinda Miller; Suzy Chaffee, US Native American Olympic Team Foundation; and Governor-Elect Peter Shumlin.

Yes, the same Dave Skinas who erroneously used his position as an USDA employee to “endorse” these groups of the Abenaki Alliance.

I do want to make a point that these letters are useless in the long run. Where are the letters from other, legitimate indian tribes offering support? I would think that nothing would be more powerful than to be recognized by a group of peers with a similar background, especially those that already have federal and/or state recognition.

853 (c)(9)(B) Submission of letters, statements, and documents from: tribes in and outside Vermont that attest to the Native American Indian heritage of the applicant.

The Koasek have many supporting letters from other tribes such as the Elnu Abenaki Tribe, the Nulhegan Abenaki Tribe, and the Vermont Indigenous Alliance.

Except that these groups are incorporations, not tribes and they are not from outside Vermont. I’m sorry, but this part just does not count.

There are copies of endorsement letters enclosed. I believe there is more information out there and I will add it when it becomes available. If you’d like to comment, do it through email. Comments on this blog itself are disabled.

As for this application itself? Only one word comes to mind: Incomplete.

Livin’ Magazine- Abenaki: People Of The Dawnland

Just thought you’d like this little treat I dug up.

http://livinmagazine.com/2007/05/02/abenaki-people-of-the-dawnland/

It seems that the battle between the Alliance incorporations and their opponents has dragged on for years now.

 

Beware of Imposters

It has come to my attention that someone has attempted to mimic my blog:

http://vermontnativejusticeabenaki.wordpress.com/

Apparently, the “author” of this blog was upset with the inability to troll my blog with comments, so they decided to start their own.

Just so that you know, I’m on to who you are. Cheers!

Check out the screenshot below. Isn’t it pretty?

For your information, they have also tried this tactic with another blog. It seems that Mr.Buchholz is also an object of their ire.

So much for complaining about harassment. If H.16 passes, they too, shall be held responsible for such defamatory tactics.

Running For Cover: Alliance and State of Vermont Attempts to Obscure Truth

There’s a glitch with the applications for the Alliance groups.

Take a look at this file:

letters-of-recommendation

And look at this snippet:

5 C.F.R. § 2635.702, Misuse of Position, Subsection (b), prohibits a Federal employee
from creating the appearance of Governmental sanction or endorsement of his or
another’s personal activities.

Therefore, a Federal employee may sign a letter of recommendation using his/her
official title and/or agency letterhead only in response to a request for an employment
recommendation or character reference based upon personal knowledge of the ability
or character of an individual with whom he/she has dealt in the course of Federal
employment or whom he/she is recommending for Federal employment.

Official Title and Agency Letterhead May Not Be Used:

• to write a letter recommending a personal friend or relative;
• to write a letter recommending a colleague being considered for tenure;
• to write a letter recommending a contractor, vendor, or supplier of goods or
services;
• to write a letter recommending a grant applicant in support of a grant
application to the USDA or another Federal agency;

Such a letter may violate the anti‐representation statutes. USDA employees may write
letters representing their own opinions regarding an individual only if they are
personally familiar with the applicant. This means that the knowledge gained about the
individual must not have been gained through Federal employment.
Employees may provide a factual letter that simply verifies that a contract or project
was completed and that the individual or organization accomplished objectives agreed
upon under the terms of the contract or project in a successful manner. However, in
order to avoid accusations of favoritism, agencies choosing to issue these types of
letters must be consistent and prepared to issue such letters in response to every
request.

Now, let’s take a look at the letterheads on the letters of recommendation from Dave Skinas and David Lacy in the Koasek,  Elnu and Nulhegan applications:

Dave Skinas:

Koasek application

Nulhegan application

 

David Lacy:

Elnu application

Nulhegan application

Therefore, by studying these images, one can conclude that both Dave Skinas and David Lacy have committed an ethical violation as described above.

By recommending these groups for recognition, they are giving the impression that these Federal agencies support the recognition of such groups. This is erroneous.

Apparently, the commission is aware of this violation and now must find some new scholars.

Take a look here:

http://vcnaa.vermont.gov/agendas

Check out the bold text:

AGENDA

12:00 POTLUCK:
Potluck & Community Discussion
1:00 CALL TO ORDER

1. Approve minutes of January 19, 2011
2. Update on current recognition legislation
3. Public Records Redaction Process
I. Names and addresses
II. Genealogical information
III. Archaeological site location data
4. Review Draft Commission Report re: Koasek of the Koas
5. Missisquoi Application Review
I. Review Scholar Reports
II. General Discussion
6. Status of Active Scholar’s List
I. How do we attract more experts?
New Business
Handouts:
Minutes of January 19, 2011
Draft Commission Report re: Koasek
Missisquoi Scholar Reports

The first part of the bolded text concerns legislation that would redact public records, such as geneological records and other sensitive records. Here’s a link to the bill as proposed:

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/database/status/summary.cfm?Bill=H.0016&Session=2012

H-016

BILL AS INTRODUCED H.16

2011

Introduced by Representatives Obuchowski of Rockingham and Partridge of Windham

Referred to Committee on Date:

Subject: Crimes; disturbing peace by use of telephone or other electronic communications; Internet website postings

Statement of purpose: This bill proposes to permit a person to be charged with a violation of Vermont’s disturbing the peace statute if the person, with the intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, or annoy another person, knowingly and intentionally uses false and defamatory Internet website postings to disturb the other person’s peace, quiet, or right of privacy.

An act relating to harassment and disturbing the peace through false and defamatory Internet website postings to disturb the other person’s peace, quiet, or right of privacy.

It would not be out of place to assume that a blog post(s) could be considered harassment or disturbing the peace under this act.  I think this vague and a direct violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Posting about something and harassing someone are two completely different things.

By tying both together, this Act will make it possible for the Alliance groups to effectively hide their genealogy further and do it in a legal manner.

It is hereby enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Vermont:

Sec. 1. 13 V.S.A. § 1027 is amended to read:

§ 1027. DISTURBING PEACE BY USE OF TELEPHONE OR OTHER ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS

(a) A person who, with intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass,
annoy, makes contact by means of a telephonic or other electronic
communication with another and (i) makes any request, suggestion,
proposal which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, or indecent; (ii) threatens to inflict
injury or physical harm to the person or property of any person; or (iii)
disturbs, or attempts to disturb, by repeated anonymous telephone calls or other
electronic communications, whether or not conversation ensues, the peace,
quiet, or right of privacy of any person at the place where the communication
or communications are received shall be fined not more than $250.00 or be
imprisoned not more than three months or both. If the defendant has
previously been convicted of a violation of this section or of an offense under
the laws of another state or of the United States which would have been an
offense under this act if committed in this state, the defendant shall be fined
or both.12 not more than $500.00 or imprisoned for not more than six months,

(b) An intent to terrify, threaten, harass or annoy may be inferred by the
trier of fact from the use of obscene, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language or
the making of a threat or statement or repeated anonymous telephone calls or
other electronic communications as set forth in this section and any trial court
may in its discretion include a statement to this effect in its jury charge.

I’m not sure why they want to regulate ANNOYING speech. Are we not to hold the Vermont media to the same standard, being that they write ANNOYING articles and report ANNOYING news that make some people uncomfortable?

(c) An offense committed by use of a telephone or other electronic
communication device as set forth in this section shall be considered to have
been committed at either the place where the telephone call or calls originated
or at the place where the communication or communications or calls were
received.

(d) As used in this section:
(1) “Disturbing or attempting to disturb the peace, quiet, or right of privacy by electronic communications” may include knowingly and intentionally causing a false and defamatory posting to be made to an Internet website.

There’s nothing false or defamatory about the truth, especially that of the Abenaki Alliance and their intentions!

(2) “Makes contact by means of an electronic communication with another” may include causing a posting to be made to an Internet website.
Sec. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE
This act shall take effect on July 1, 2011.

This means that Representatives Partridge and Obuchowski want to make it a crime for you to criticize other people on your blog. They want to equate posting the truth about other people with harassment and threatening language.

H.16 is a terrible idea, a dictatorial wet dream. This effectively would put an end to your right to speak out against something, a right that was guaranteed to you by the founding fathers of this country.

Write to Reps. Obuchowski and Partridge and tell them how you feel!

Edit:

In a letter to the editor of the Newport Daily Express on January 20th, 2011, Donald Stevens Jr. acknowledged that two members of the scholar panel (David Lacy and Dave Skinas) are federal employees.

Mr.Stevens and the VCNAA knew about this ethical violation but did nothing.

Edit #2:

In the minutes for the December 21st, 2010 VCNAA meeting, the following line is mentioned:

2. Scholar’s Panel Update

Due to work restrictions, David Lacy, having completed his review of  two applications must be removed from the active scholar’s list.

It doesn’t say WHY he must be removed but this goes to show that they knew something and again, did nothing about it or were vague about what he did.

It’s a no-brainer for one to assume that he was told to stop writing endorsements of these people by the federal agency he works for.

“The Fix Is In”: 2/9/11 Seven Days column mentions Abenaki recognition

Shay Totten has done a brief write-up on the continuing issue of abenaki recognition, especially where it concerns the Abenaki First Nation’s grievance:

http://www.7dvt.com/2011fix

Excerpt as follows:
Abenaki Angst

A group of Abenaki that opposes the recognition of several Vermont-based tribes won’t be allowed to testify before a key Senate committee.

The Abenaki First Nation initially got the OK to testify before the Senate Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs Committee, but that offer was partially rescinded by Sen. Vince Illuzzi (R-Essex/Orleans), the committee’s chair and a proponent of Abenaki recognition.

Illuzzi said the group’s in-state members can testify, but the out-of-state members can only provide written testimony. “We only meet for three hours a day and only have so much time to take direct testimony,” he said. “We’ve done the same for other out-of-state witnesses on bills.”

That’s not good enough for Denise Watso of the Abenaki First Nation, which has tribal members in Vermont, New York and Québec. Watso questions the authenticity of at least two tribes seeking state recognition.

“Why are lawmakers like Sen. Illuzzi afraid to hear what we have to say? Why are they scared to look us in the eye?” she asked. “These are not rhetorical questions. They are willing to take the time to hear testimony, they just refuse to hear from us. It’s just a lot easier to ignore emails and letters than it is to hear real-life Abenaki people speaking out for truth and justice in the halls of the Statehouse.”

The House General, Housing and Military Affairs Committee has not established such restrictions this year, but it has yet to receive a request from out-of-state groups.

To date, two tribes that claim Abenaki heritage are seeking recognition: the Nulhegan and the Elnu. A third, the Koasek, has been approved for recognition, but no formal bill has been introduced.

It’s unclear if other tribes or family bands will follow suit this session under a new state recognition law passed last year.

The Missisquoi Tribe was in the process of gathering up the necessary documents, but its leader — Chief April St. Francis-merrill — was arrested last week for allegedly stealing money from a vulnerable adult.

It’s about time that the Vermont media heard from people with legitimate Abenaki standing.

Mr.Illuzzi claimed that he gave Skip Bernier time to testify but it was inadequate and when compared to the hours of testimony from Alliance groups, was a pittance. Nancy Millette-Doucet, a New Hampshire resident, has had more opportunities to speak out (mainly at VCNAA meetings) than Skip Bernier. This must be rectified as the Abenaki First Nation and anyone else who opposes recognition of these fraudulent tribes, must be given equal standing to speak up on this issue.

Mr.Illuzzi, Tear Down That Wall!

I’ve been hearing a lot about how Vince Illuzzi doesn’t want testimony from people who are not Vermonters, etc.

I find it hilarious because there is one person that is always at the VCNAA meetings, always injecting her opinions into native issues in the state of Vermont.

In fact, here’s her address:

Koasek Traditional Abenaki of the KOAS
Nancy Millette Doucet, Chief
Main St
North Haverhill, NH
603-728-9646

Wait a minute. What’s that? A New Hampshire address?

You mean to tell me that a NEW HAMPSHIRE resident can have a say in recognition issues in Vermont but the Odanak people up in Quebec cannot have a say?

It’s time that Mr.Illuzzi dropped his bias. If Nancy Doucet can support members of her confabulation here in Vermont, then Odanak should have the right to support their people here in Vermont.

This is quite possibly the most absurd part of this recognition process.

Mr.Illuzzi, tear down that wall and allow the Odanak people a say in this process as well!

Don’t be fooled by the rhetoric of Donald Stevens Jr. If the Odanak people truly wanted to do what he claims in the Vermont Digger article, rest assured, it would have already been exposed by now either on this blog or another.

VT Digger article on Abenaki Recognition

http://vtdigger.org/2011/02/05/who-is-an-indian-abenaki-lawmakers-try-to-set-recognition-standards/

Members from two Abenaki tribes testifying before a House committee last week said that state recognition is more about authentication than land claims or building casinos.

Didn’t take long for them to raise the alarm bells with this statement. I’ll believe it when I see it. I do wish I could un-see the casino management contract and the interest in the Phillips deed.

“We are at a crossroads in history, said Donald Stevens, chief of the Nulhegan Band, one of two Abenaki tribes with petitions before the Legislature seeking recognition.

“We deserve the right to our identity,” he added, placing the Indian warrior Crazy Horse on the same historical mantle as Martin Luther King Jr.

Does anyone else find it absurd how Donald Warren Stevens Jr. sees to compare this recognition debacle to the plight of Crazy Horse? I highly doubt that Crazy Horse would approve of the recognition quandary in the state of Vermont. He’d probably scoff at it.  Again, this is to be expected from these people.

Chief Roger Longtoe Sheehan, who testified later in the day on behalf of the Elnu Tribe — the other band seeking recognition, said that in the hierarchy of the Indian world a card is needed to validate one’s identity as a Native American.

“The most hateful thing one Abenaki can say to another is that you’re not an Indian,” he said.  “And that is what’s going on now.”

Except that the evidence doesn’t agree with Mr.Sheehan and his claim. I have already exposed the Elnu application and Mr.Sheehan has  ancestors who were Irish Americans that came from NYC. However, does Mr.Sheehan acknowledge this anywhere in his application?

Again, the Alliance has tirelessly worked to discredit their enemies by pulling out the hate card. Nevermind the fact that members of this Alliance have thrown their share of mud over the years. Nevermind the fact that they have probably told other people to “get bent” when those people came to them to seek legitimacy.

Along with bills for recognition before the House Committee on General, Housing and Military Affairs, the Senate Committee on Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs is also taking testimony on recognition for each tribe.

The bills come to the Legislature as the final step in a process that began a year ago with the creation of the Vermont Commission on Native American Affairs.  The commission was empowered by the Legislature to initiate a step-by-step process by which each Abenaki tribe in the state could apply for recognition as Native American.

As defined by the bill, the process would be supervised by the commission and require each tribe to submit documentation, approved by three independent scholars, to validate its claim.  Once that had been accomplished, it would be left to the commission to review the claim and petition the Legislature for recognition on a tribe-by-tribe basis.

One of the caveats in the bill that created the process stipulated that if the Legislature did not act on the petitions, a tribe would be recognized two years after its petition was received.

I’m sure the Alliance is hoping that the Legislature doesn’t act on their petitions. That’s the only way they’re going to get anywhere at this point.

Representative Helen Head of Burlington, a Democrat who chairs the House Committee on General, Housing and Military Affairs, said the Legislature should act on the petitions.

“I would rather be pro-active,” she said last month.

And I hope she’s listening since she is the representative for the area where I live in, which means that I can choose not to vote for her again in 2012.

For the Abenaki, whose struggle for recognition goes back to the 1970s and includes a rejection by the Vermont Supreme Court, it has been an arduous ordeal.

“I’ll never subject myself to this process again,” testified Stevens, who said that he knows Indian blood flows through his veins, no matter what happens with his tribe’s petition.

Again, more rhetoric from Mr.Stevens. He’s certainly a colorful character.

According to its petition, the Nulhegan Band is located along the waterways of Orleans and northern Essex counties. As of September 2010, the tribe consisted of roughly 260 members, among whom 96 percent are related to one another.

The commission found that “Chief Don Stevens is related by blood or marriage to at least 160 members.”

Their biased and manufactured commission you mean? Of course! It’s not like they would actually do the research.

In making their case as an enduring community within Vermont, the Nulhegan Band says its presence can be documented by scholarly research, providing examples in its petition like how members harvested fish.

“They formed into a V with the outside canoes named the rattlers for metal nuts on the ends of the lines that rattled, and they moved down a channel between Big and Little Salem Lakes.

“The rattlers scared the walleyes to the center where they could be caught. Local anger about this practice from Euro-American fishermen shows a distinctive identity of the Nulhegan group. If the dominant culture performed this practice, they would not have been so angry.”

The petition also notes that during ice fishing, Nulhegan Abenaki kept perch eyes used for bait under their tongues to prevent the fish eyes from freezing.

One of the scholars on a three-member panel who reviewed the band’s documentation, David Skinas is an anthropologist employed with the federal National Resources Conservation Service. Prior to that he worked for the Vermont Division for Historic Preservation and, according to his resumé, he has been working with the Abenaki since 1988, helping mainly to recover Native American remains.

Skinas told legislators he had spent up to 30 hours reviewing the Nulhegan Band’s petition for recognition. He also said experts on the panel had conducted the review independent of one another, and that its recommendation for state recognition was not the result of a collaborative effort.

Not the result of a collaborative effort? What? Do you really think people are stupid enough to believe this?

Among the conclusions he offered to the committee, Mr. Skinas said he “felt very strongly” that the band has an historical cohesiveness and that its presence in Vermont has a “demonstrated continuity.”

A second scholar, testifying on behalf of the Elnu Tribe — located in southeast Vermont, said the criteria set up by the commission allowed experts to return to the historical records and examine them in depth.

A “repeating priming of the pump” has provided the Legislature a view from different angles, said Eloise Bell, a folklorist and curator with the Lake Champlain Maritime Museum.

Bell said the Elnu Tribe had met all the criteria laid down by the commission, and recommended recognition.

“The Elnu provide ample and highly detailed evidence of the presence of antecedent Native people in the Bellows Falls and Windham County area from a wide variety of sources: archaeological evidence, historical documents; citations from numerous academic and local histories, and oral traditions from families within the kinship group,” she said in a written evaluation submitted to the Legislature.

“The combination of evidence from these various sources, presented chronologically in a timeline which spans the 16th through 20th centuries, indicates the continuity of community presence in this region by the Abenaki families from whom the Elnu are descended.”

Not bad for a tribe that was incorporated only recently.  Oh right, there’s no factual evidence that these tribes existed 4 centuries ago but in the name of being politically correct, they get a pass. Give me a break.

No direct dissenting testimony came before the committee during last week’s hearing. But there were indications, some outside the committee’s hearing, that recognition has become a divisive political issue among some of the Abenaki tribes.

Thanks to Vince Illuzzi, that dissenting testimony was squashed out. You see, the legislators and senators are so sick of this thing, that they’ll do anything to put an end to it, even if it means ignoring the evidence against recognition.

Stevens told the House committee that the Abenaki in Odanak, located in Quebec, oppose state recognition for the Nulhegan Band. He said he was not going get caught up “in all this craziness,” presumably stemming from challenges over whether the Vermont Abenaki are really Native Americans.

Stevens went on to attribute the allegations to a competition over land claims, saying that Odanak Abenaki want to claim the Northeast Kingdom as part of their tribal territory, with an eye toward operating a casino.

I personally have never seen evidence of this. Mr.Stevens never talked about the Phillips Deed.

A couple of days prior to his testimony, Stevens contacted the state’s Department of Public Safety by email to alert them to the possibility of violence at the State House from at least one opponent of recognition. He asked police to intervene and prevent the individual from stepping on State House grounds.

He overreacted in a grand manner because he knew that it would damage an opponent of this recognition process.  When members of the Abenaki Alliance cannot win a battle of wits, they resort to such actions.

No signs of violence ever materialized during last week’s testimony, but Sheehan told the committee that there was little to be gained by trying to define who is really an Indian.

Actually, when money is at stake, you want to be 110% sure that the people you are giving that money to, ARE WHO THEY SAY THEY ARE! In an age where someone can claim to be “disabled” and use that money for things that it isn’t intended for, you have to be absolutely sure that this kind of abuse will not take place!

“I really don’t think there is a full-blood Abenaki out there,” he said, pointing to the interracial marriages that have occurred over the last 400 years.

He may not think this but it doesn’t mean that it isn’t possible.

Recognition, he added, might cut down some of the infighting among tribes and lead to a healing of old wounds.

Old wounds will not heal until the Alliance stops pouring salt into them with their actions!

“If anyone asks who you are, say French-Canadian,” testified a woman, speaking of the time she left a reservation in Oregon and moved to Los Angeles.

Charlene McManis has since moved back to Vermont, and last week she told legislators that there might be no such thing as a racial identity.

“What is an Indian? Believe it or not, even us Indians question it,” she told the committee. “It’s so diverse.”

She said her grandmother once told her that her identity as a Native American came from the heart rather than the blood. What is odd, said Ms. McManis, is “to have to get recognition from the government.”

It’s not odd. It’s standard operating procedure, since recognition gives people access to state and federal grants and other privileges. Thanks to loopholes (and there are plenty), there are “tribes” full of new-age wanna-bes in other states that have access to money that they do not deserve.

It’s bad enough that the ancestors of these new-age wanna-bes WIPED OUT the indians, stole their land and now, these people want to throw more salt into a wound and steal the identities of the remaining indian ancestors?

According to testimony, recognition will allow the tribes to apply for federal grants toward education, and enable tribal members to sell their crafts as Native American products.

Such a label, explained Mr. Sheehan, will put more money in the pockets of Abenaki craftsmen, as a Native American basket is far more marketable than one lacking the label.

It’s all about the benjamins, the moolah, the wampum, etc.

It’s like Vermont maple syrup, he said, noting that it’s the brand of choice among consumers.

Testimony before the committee repeatedly recalled how long the fight for recognition has been going on.

“People have fought this battle longer than I have been alive,” testified Luke Willard, the 30-something-year-old chairman of the commission.

Normally, I’d just dismiss this article as another example of the Alliance folks and their brand of discrediting their opponents. However, there’s a lot to be said for people who plant moles such as “Gluscabi” on this blog and then use such a thing to tip off others.

By the way, if you want to contact “Gluscabi”, his/her email address is rbarbacane@hotmail.com.  That’s right. You mess with me on my blog and your information becomes public record.

I don’t appreciate what Mr.Stevens did. I’ve already explained that I have no interest in violence. However, the Alliance will take this ball and run with it because they have nothing of substance.

For that, I have an Youtube clip that fits this whole sham perfectly.

St.Albans Messenger- Details on April Merrill Arrest

Another newspaper picks up this story:

http://www.samessenger.com/node/1100

Sheriff’s office alleges exploitation of adult

SWANTON — April St. Frances-Merrill, chief of the St. Frances-Sokoki Band of the Abenaki Nation, has been charged with felony exploitation of a vulnerable adult by the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office.

According to a statement issued by the sheriff’s office today, the office received a complaint from Adult Protective Services last summer concerning the finances of an elderly man.

The complaint concerned suspicious activity in his bank account over a period of 4.5 years.

“During the course of the investigation… it was learned that April Merrill was taking care of this elderly male’s financial business,” the press release stated.

The press release did not say when Merrill would appear in court to answer the charges.

It’s actually St.Francis, not St.Frances. Regardless, just keeping the readers abreast of this situation as it develops. Should anything else happen, this blog will be on top of it.