This document contains information about racism in the anti-Makah whaling movement. We are distributing this to people who might be interested in this type of behavior and the consequences it can cause. While this list is by no means a comprehensive tally of the racist behavior out there, we consider it fair and representative of the anti-Makah whaling movement. Most of the information here comes from the Internet discussion list and website Stop Whale Kill (SWK, www.stopwhalekill.org). It’s an umbrella website where anti-whaling activists gather to discuss tactics, ideology and organizational strategy.
We’ve divided this into three categories: first, the kind of thing that the average person should immediately recognize as racist (vicious stereotypes, demonization, threats of violence); other ways racism of anti-whalers I’ve been watching manifests itself; and the depth of their support for far right anti-Indian politicians.
We finish up by identifying some of the major players, who you are probably aware of anyway. We also tacked on some info about Paul Watson people may or may not be aware of.
EXAMPLES OF OVERT RACISM
- Overtly racist rhetoric from anti-whaling activists
These are a few examples of racism from people opposed to the Makah whale hunt:
- A sign held up during a May 1999 anti-whaling protest read "Save a whale, harpoon a Makah." Bumper stickers advertising this same sentiment became widespread along the Olympic Peninsula and other places. Sources say that Chuck Owens, Co-Founder of Peninsula Citizens for the Protection of Whales, a Port Angeles, WA based anti-whaling activist group, made the sign – though he has not responded to my attempts to confirm this.
- A widely distributed "poem" by Athena McEntyre, then of Sea Defense Alliance, spread an anti-whaling message using venomous racist stereotypes of Indian people. The "poem" described the Makah as alcoholic ("I'll sniff a little meth/I'll drink a keg of beer"), violent ("I'll beat up my wife/Leave my kiddies bereft/This is Makah training/And tradition must not be left") and lazy ("O great Creator/Send a whale, but heck/I think while I'm waiting/I'll pick up my welfare check").
- One member of the Internet discussion list Stop Whale Kill – an umbrella list for a number of the anti-whaling groups – declared she was "tired of hearing" how hard the First Nations people have had it, saying "they should speak to someone of Jewish or African heritage...The First Nations people have not suffered even a fraction of the atrocities that these groups have."
Instead of refuting this viewpoint, list member Anthony Marr of Heal Our Planet Earth - Global Environmental Organization (HOPE-GEO, www.hope-geo.org) wrote that he understood the poster's feelings "to the letter," and offered to work with her on a Canadian anti-indigenous whaling campaign.
These sentiments should be recognized as what they are: simply holocaust denial The native peoples of the American continent suffered a population reduction of over 90 percent (some estimate it as high as 98) after Europeans arrived. Denying that or not taking the time to learn about it is comparable to denying the Nazi holocaust.
- Writers on the aforementioned SWK list have compared native rituals to Satanic rituals – without being challenged.
- In June, anti-whaling activist Jim Robertson recently forwarded a "humorous" message which compared the Makah and other Indian cultures to the Third Reich, referring to Chief Littlehitler of the Makah." It also said the tribe would be using their traditional "ceremonial beer" to prepare for the hunt -- a tasteless reference to the high levels of alcoholism in Indian Country. This would be the equivalent of referring to inner city African Americans drinking traditional, ceremonial Olde English. The source of the message, a Canadian “satire” site, also contains messages overtly hostile to gays.
It's disturbing enough that these ideas exist in an ostensibly progressive movement. What's even more disturbing is this: no one within the movement appears to condemn these ideas. Robertson himself seems dangerously anti-Indian, having spoken of an “Indian agenda” to control natural resources in the Pacific Northwest.
- Anti-whaling activists refuse to challenge racists within the ranks
- Consider Robertson's forward of the racist “satire” as one recent example. View it in its entirety at http://www.ourpress.com/kill_all_whales.htm
Instead of challenging the post, two people accused Robertson of giving opposing "activists juice for their racism campaign" – as if it were merely a campaign, rather than a legitimate concern. List member Dian Hardy said it is "the kind of writing that got Athena into so much trouble," without mentioning that the trouble might be warranted. List owner and administrator Susan Hudgens wrote that people should simply list URLs of where they got material to post -- presumably meaning that as long as someone else wrote it, it was OK. The only debate that occurred was whether the piece was funny or not.
Nevertheless, Dan Larsen, Technology & Entertainment Producer for SeattleInsider.com found this “humor” racist enough to remove the very same posting from the SI Makah Whaling Forum once it was forwarded just hours later.
- While members of the list continually profess to be “shocked” at accusations of racism, they are silent on any race issues – except to accuse defenders of the Makah of racism.
Jim Robertson, one of the most prolific writers of the anti-whaling movement, uses the phrase “Indian agenda” in much the same way radical politicians like Senator Slade Gorton do. Witness this letter to the editor of a local newspaper, available on the SWK website:
“Racially motivated militias in paramilitary garb have been guarding poachers logging on Canadian Crown lands, illegally catching endangered salmon in British Columbia, and trapping lobster out of season in New Brunswick. Ranchers in Montana are defiantly running cattle on alpine meadows well into the eastern half of Glacier National Park. And, in the National Marine Sanctuary off Washington's coast, commercial fishermen are blasting whales with anti-tank guns from the decks of their motor boats. Are we witnessing the uprising of a right-wing group trying to assert its supremacy? These acts signal the incarnation of an Indian agenda laying claim to protected lands and wildlife, under the feel-good guise of resurrecting cultural tradition.”
This is rhetoric and argument straight out of the anti-Indian movement.
- This climate of intolerance has had terrible results, and is well-documented.
We suspect most anti-whalers will mouth a perfunctory "Yeah, we're against those things, but ..." when confronted with this information. But notably few anti-whalers have condemned these actions. Paul Watson (of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, the largest of the anti-whaling groups targeting the Makah) has even publicly questioned whether any of these threats really occurred, speculating that the bomb threats were made by anti-racists (!).
Here are a few of the lowlights:
- Death threats poured into the Makah Reservation. A bomb threat that closed the Puyallup Tribe's Chief Leschi School – nowhere near Neah Bay. When the Neah Bay high School football team reached the state finals in 1999, protesters showed up with bumper stickers stating "Save a whale, kill a Makah" on their cars, throwing things and screaming obscenities at the players. (Jayda Evans, Seattle Times, Dec. 12, 1999). At THE HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL TEAM. Other non-Makah Indians reported the same kind of threats as Makah tribal members.
- Kenny Clark, then of the anti-whaling Sea Defense Alliance, told the Salt Lake Tribune that "I've had phone calls here telling me, `I've got . . . a gun, tell me who you want me to go after." Thankfully, Clark told the paper he tried to quell any violent impulses. The Seattle Times quoted a protester who wanted to "keep faith" with his ancestors who killed "every Redskin they saw."
- The Seattle Times also published about a dozen of the more racist letters they received. One letter concluded "these people want to rekindle their traditional way of life by killing an animals that has probably twice the mental capacity they have." Another suggested that "we should also be able to take their land if they can take our whales" -- a perverse inversion of the treaty. Or consider this letter: "Natives were often referred to as 'savages,' and it seems little has changed." (Seattle Times Archives can be searched by clicking on "SEARCH ARCHIVES" - use keywords: "Letters" and "Makah")
These are the overt types of racism that most everyone recognizes as wrong -- but there are others. I have divided evidence of racism in the anti-whaling movement into two categories, first itemizing the divergent racist ideologies in the movement, and second examining the anti-whalers' support for anti-Indian politicians.
RACIST IDEOLOGIES AND HOW THEY MANIFEST THEMSELVES IN THE ANTI-WHALING MOVEMENT
These are some of the types of racism evident in the anti-whaling movement, aside from the very overt racist stereotypes just examined.
- "Indian culture itself is bad" -- or its more common and subdued variant, "Culture is good, but not this part of the culture"
Some anti-whalers, like Project Seawolf's Michael Kundu (also a Sea Shepherd representative), have taken the position that Makah culture itself is bad. In a message to Keith Hunter (Kii Yaa Tuk), an activist living at Neah Bay, Kundu opined: "with your command of the language and your ability to actually read, I'm amazed you've decided to return to the sticks of Neah Bay. You could probably even land a real job out here..." He derided the activist's "devout loyalty to a cryptic and dying culture," which he asserted would die soon: "It's only going to take another generation and a few more sessions of Congress, old boy..." As if gloating over cultural genocide wasn't bad enough, he also gloated over direct physical genocide: "It's not surprising (Indian people) easily succumbed to the the (sic) likes of Vancouver and Quadra..." (George Vancouver and Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra are generally recognized as the first explorers of the Straits of Georgia and the Inside Passage. Their relations with the indigenous peoples were, by and large, peaceful. Kundu's lack of this historical knowledge is no surprise...)
Kundu represents an extreme example of cultural imperialism -- though far from a rare example.
More often, people have said that other variants on the culture should be promoted -- whale watching rather than whale hunting, songs and dances rather than harpoons, etc. This misses the point: cultures ought not have to abide by every outsider's notion of what is palatable. That is the very essence of self-determination.
- "Multiculturalism is racism"
Other members of the SWK list have embraced the notion that "multiculturalism is racism," an idea pushed by far-right groups.
One such posting included the following: "Multiculturalism is racism in a politically correct guise," said Peter Schwartz of the Objectivist Institute, the Ayn Rand think tank. "The multiculturalists are racists," he said. "They want to judge all men and women by their unchosen ancestry, not by their chosen, individual character. These new racists base their morality on that which is outside moral choice: ethnic heritage, skin color, and geography. They are no better than the old-fashioned racists they claim to hate, except they practice a more insidious form of racism." This was subsequently lauded by three list members, including owner Susan Hudgens (herself an Objectivist Society member). It was challenged by no list member.
This sentiment runs through the entire movement. "Discrimination both against and in favour of a group based upon the factor of race is racist, and one is no better than the other," wrote Anthony Marr, May 29, 2000. Ward Connerly, the anti-Affirmative Action demagogue, couldn't have said it better.
Jim Robertson -- the “Indian agenda” guy -- told one list member that "Your white self-loathing and glorification of native cultures is a form of racial favoritism (ie: racism)." No word yet on whether Robertson considers his own white pride and demonization of native cultures racist. "Special rights" is another term thrown around on the list.
This rhetoric can only be called reactionary. Instead of looking inward, to see if accusations of eco-racism are justified, anti-whalers immediately pick up convenient buzzwords popularized by the right – however racist and anti-progress those buzzwords may be.
- "Tribes should not be sovereign nations"
Stating, in essence, that Indians are not fit to govern themselves – or “treaties are not important.”
This manifests itself primarily in either the “Culture is fine, but don’t do anything I don’t like” viewpoint or in attacks on treaty rights. In some cases, the hostility to treaties is presented honestly.
“The Treaty be damned! ... once you acknowledged (sic) the rights of the treaty, then you condone the killing!” wrote a list member on May 30, 2000. The poster later apologized after being informed that Andrew Jackson used the phrase “The treaty be damned” before leading a slaughter of Cherokee Indians.
One poster suggested list members support John Carlson, arch-conservative radio talk show host, for governor because Carlson promised to ban “commercial fishing nets in Washington state waters for both commercial fisherman (sic) and the tribes. Locke won't make this pledge, and Carlson is running against him for Governor.” Of course, even if elected, Carlson wouldn’t have the legal authority to trump treaty-protected rights – only the federal government can regulate tribal harvests, and even then, only under extreme circumstances – but the hostility to treaty rights is clear. List administrator Susan Hudgens quickly followed up this post with one of her own lauding Carlson as a “very bright and knowledgeable man” who, as the “conservative ‘token’ voice on a local PBS news show” had “sparred calmly and intelligently with all the PC sycophants at The Seattle imes (sic) and PI.”
Others pay lip service to treaties, saying they support them in most cases – but not this one. Even those, however, seem to have little knowledge or interest in how treaties actually work as the definers of political relationships.
- "It's my tax dollars those Indians are spending"
One of the biggest projects anti-whaling activists – notably Dan Spomer, a prominent anti-whaling activist and founder of the Washington Citizens Coastal Alliance – worked on with right-wing groups was a “study” by the right-wing Citizens Against Government Waste. Spomer said Rep. Jack Metcalf went "above and beyond the call of duty" in helping CAGW – gathering info for them, sharing files, etc.
Who are CAGW? They’re the folks who warn about “environmental extremism” on Earth Day, decry “wasteful government spending on misguided environmental initiatives,” and say that “the Clinton administration has made extreme environmentalism its official policy.” (!) They make fun of “environmental justice” movements, want to allow genetically modified organisms to be certified as organic foods, and generally are hostile to any environmental initiative.
Naturally, the CAGW “study” of the hunt did not include an estimate of how much cash Jack Metcalf’s lawsuit on the whale hunt and subsequent appeal cost taxpayers.
Aside from falling under the right-wing spell, this argument also ignores the trust relationship between tribes and the federal government – a relationship insisted upon by the federal government, especially when it is to advantage of non-Indian interests. It is easy to see how this kind of study falls hand in hand with racist notions of Indians as exemplified in the Athena McEntyre poem.
- Spin-off racism: Opposing whaling leads list members to oppose Indian initiatives generally
Anti-whalers have exhibited hostility to Indian initiatives other than the whale hunt, notably the parole of Leonard Peltier. Robertson especially has posted numerous messages – gathered news material and opinion pieces – hostile to native interests. This sentiment is expressed freely and without threat of reprisal on the Stop Whale Kill list.
A man who claimed to have spent 55 years as a Washington commercial fisherman told the list that “the native tribes have been the most irrisponsible (sic) of all. They wantonly destroy and waste (fisheries resources).”
Either unaware of the hostility many white commercial fishers hold toward tribal fishers – or uncaring of that fact – SWK list administrator Susan wrote welcoming this man to the list, and asking to “learn” from his experiences and what he had witnessed. Curiously, this was in spite of the fact that his main criticism of Indian hunters was that they are “cowards” who “hunt like old ladies.”
Sadly, this is just one example of so-called environmentalists trying to dig up dirt on all Indians – apparently ignorant of the fact that different tribes have different histories, traditions and cultures. Jim Robertson continually posts messages claiming that the First Nations were the first polluters – hunting species to death, destroying the landscape with fire, etc. How this relates to the Makah whale hunt is anyone’s guess.
Some list members make arguments popularized by Wise Use and anti-Indian groups. List member Charronne Harper – who claims to be married to a Chippewa tribal member – wrote on May 30, 2000:
“Point to keep in mind: Indian people have more voting options than the rest of us: they can remain on the reserve and vote in tribal elections, they can move off the reserve and vote in municipal elections, and living anywhere, they can vote in state and federal elctions. (sic) If they rent property from a white landlord, they can vote for the council that sets local bylaws, taxes and regulations. But if a white person rents from an Indian band, they have no say at all in the local council which sets taxes, bylaws, and other regulations.”
This is the kind of rhetoric that the anti-Indian movement spreads wantonly to undercut the jurisdiction of tribal governments.
- "Non-racism" as spin control
After accusations of racism began against the anti-whalers, they had a few choices about how to respond: either ferret out the racists within and look inward, or choose to do “spin control” about their own bigotry. They chose spin control. Here is the evidence:
Anthony Marr and Susan Hudgens both wrote that the movement should recruit Indian anti-whalers to join the campaign, because such people “would not suffer the debilitating effect of being branded a “racist’.” The irony of having to recruit Indians so as not to appear anti-Indian was lost on list members. No one seemed to notice this is the same strategy the Republican Party uses to attack affirmative action – get a minority to say it, it will distract attention from the race issue.
Paul Watson has been the worst of the spin-controllers, actually claiming to have received a vision at Wounded Knee which told him to halt the hunting of whales (see the last section of this paper).
- “Indians are not discriminated against”
Many posters to SWK attempt to minimize the wrong done to native peoples, either discounting the number of Indians killed after the European colonization or comparing tribes to other oppressed groups. Not surprisingly, they always find that Indians have it better than other groups -- because Indians are who they're trying to target, of course.
- General right-wing notions
People who challenge the anti-whalers are accused of holding a "liberal bias," (Dian Hardy, May 29) or of being “politically correct” (numerous list members). The fact that this comes from a bunch of whale-hugging new age hippies does not seem ironic to them.
Twice, list members have threatened to call the National Rifle Association to solicit their help on stopping the Makah. Check out this message from Jean Kennedy: “The ultimate irony? The Clinton/Gore administration, well-known for championing gun control laws and chronic NRA-bashing, seems to have NO problem in putting taxpayer funded anti-tank weapons in the hands of these guys. Remember: it's YOUR money being used to buy these weapons. This would be a great time to call the NRA and let them know what's going on out here!”
While anti-whalers are loath to declare a political affiliation, saying that animal issues cut across party lines, some list members are devotees of right-wing gossip columnist Matt Drudge and goofy Seattle conservative radio station KVI.
- Wacky stuff -- not necessarily racist, but just weird
Anthony Marr of HOPE-GEO has a New Age theory about why humans exist on earth: his cosmic friend told him that we are intended to take animals with us into space.
Marr's message is reproduced in its entirety:
Totally disgusted with my own species I said to my cosmic friend Raminothna one day, "We human beings are truly the scourge of the Earth. Gaia would be a damn sight healthier had we never evolved into being at all."
“Currently, yes,” Raminothna commented, “but ultimately, no.”
“What do you mean?"
“Tell me. What is the ultimate fate of the Earth?”
“Ultimately? Well, the sun will burn out in another five or so billion years. It will become a Red Giant and engulf the inner planets, the Earth included. So, I guess the ultimate fate of the Earth is to be incinerated.”
“What will come of life on Earth then, the birds, the whales?”
“Life on Earth will continue evolving until then, and then incinerated.”
“So then, what is the meaning of life if its ultimate fate is to be destroyed?”
“I’ve never thought about the meaning of life in this light. If the ultimate fate of life is destruction, then I’d say that life is ultimately meaningless.”
“Unless . . .”
“Unless?”
“Unless it can survive that catastrophe, of course.”
“But how?”
“Why don't you tell me?”
“The only way I can think of is if it is delivered from the Solar System before hand.”
“By whom?”
“By some planet saviour, such as you?”
“No. By some indigenous species capable of space technology, some Saviour Species, such as you, Homo sapiens,” said Raminothna.
The New Age fun stuff doesn’t stop there. List administrator Susan believes that by sending psychic vibrations to whales, observers can tell the creatures when to dive.
PROMOTION OF RACIST POLITICIANS
- Anti-whaling activists have gone out of their way to ally with anti-Indian politicians
The two most prominent foes of tribal sovereignty in Washington, Sen. Slade Gorton and Rep. Jack Metcalf, are featured prominently and praised on the Stop Whale Kill website.(These links are no longer active as neither of these politicians are in Congress as of Jan. 2001, Metcalf chose not to run for re-election and Gorton was defeated by Maria Cantwell)
Three environmental groups, including The Fund for Animals, Breach Marine Protection and Australians for Animals were co-plaintiffs in Metcalf's lawsuit against the Commerce Department, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Sue Miller, a Sea Shepherd employee, was also a party to the lawsuit. (Paul Watson claimed, more than once, that Sea Shepherd was a party to the lawsuit - Metcalf v. Daley - but all searches through Lexis and other legal databases uncovered no participation by SSCS in the suit. It was later discovered that Miller was party to the suit. Although Miller is an SSCS employee, she is an individual party and Sea Shepherd cannot "attach" itself through her legally - MTH)
At a Seattle "Town Hall Panel" in June 1999, members of Sea Shepherd called Metcalf a "stellar leader" and "a great public servant." Dan Spomer, a prominent anti-whaling activist with the Washington Citizens Coastal Alliance, has praised Metcalf for going "above and beyond the call of duty" to stop the hunt, citing his office's work with Citizens Against Government Waste as an example. Spomer has written that the notion Metcalf and Gorton are anti-Indian is a result of people "chanting the nonsense put out by Native rights groups."
Multiple statements of their proud association with Metcalf have been made. “CAGW is involved heavily with us right now- and have been in contact with a large number of congressional reps and other government sources on the hunt. In fact, Rep. Metcalf has been supplying them with documentation from his office- an effort which I consider above and beyond the call of duty,” Dan Spomer e-mail, May 29. “Congressman Jack Metcalf is, as usual, taking the lead on this issue, and YOU need to take part!” Spomer, June 26.
- These politicians are prominent critics of tribes, not “casual” anti-Indian politicians
In 1983 Metcalf lobbied for Congress to unilaterally "abrogate all existing treaties" with American Indian nations. Once a board member for the now-defunct S/SPAWN (Salmon-Steelhead Preservation Action for Washington Now), an early property rights group, Metcalf continually targeted tribal sovereignty and attempted to dismantle Indian fishing rights -- something he continues as a supporter of United Property Owners of Washington, a wise use group.
Metcalf's ties with far-right racist groups are well documented. Metcalf has been featured often in The Spotlight, a racist newspaper that is published by the virulently anti-Semitic Willis Carto, endorses Austria's far-right politician Jorg Haider, defends holocaust denier David Irving and promotes "New World Order" conspiracy theories. In 1984, Metcalf lauded the Spotlight for doing "a really good job" lobbying Congress about the perils of "the international bankers," among other issues.
Metcalf also became a national co-chair of Redeem Our Country, an anti-Federal Reserve group. The other ROC co-chairs included notorious racist Eustace Mullins (described by Chip Berlet of Political Research Associates, an organization tracking the American right, as "the most vicious anti-Semite on the face of the planet") and segregationist John Rarick.
- Alliances with anti-Indian politicians boost the anti-Indian agendas of those politicians
These emotional arguments over whaling have been used by anti-Indian politicians to gain support for their campaigns against treaty rights.
Slade Gorton, Washington's senior senator, called the hunt an "aggressive effort orchestrated by the tribes to show they can avoid the laws that govern the rest of us," and said "I am more convinced today than ever before that we must bring common sense back to the relationship between this country, our laws and Native American tribes. All Americans should be subject to the same laws" -- in other words, Indian nations should not be allowed their treaty-guaranteed rights. This type of rhetoric is often used by the anti-native set to justify the abrogation of treaties -- ignoring the benefits that American citizens enjoy every day as a result of those treaties, and at the expense of the native population.
The entire letter appears on the SWK website, and is characterized by Susan as a "very mild" statement.
When one activist mentioned that he found it ironic that Sea Shepherd was pushing Gorton as an environmentalist on the Makah issue while also boycotting Gorton's Seafood, Sea Shepherd Public & Sponsor Relations Director Frank Trinkle said that was because the Gorton family sold out the seafood business to a European corporation.
At the same time, though, Sea Shepherd activist Andrew Christie was using this as "proof" the group had not entered into any Faustian bargain with Gorton:
"I suggest you dismiss any conspiracy theories and quid pro quo scenarios you have built up in your mind around this non-issue. (You may also go to our website and note that we list Gorton's Seafood as a boycott target re the Faroe Islands pilot whale hunt."
- Boosting these politicians threatens environmental agendas as well
Metcalf and anti-whaling groups also worked together to support the right-wing group Citizens Against Government Waste’s study of the whale hunt. This same group warned against "environmental extremism on Earth Day, said that "the Clinton administration has made extreme environmentalism its official policy" and has criticized such radical leftism as the organic foods program.
Metcalf, Gorton and their ilk also have terrible environmental records. The Sierra Club's website reports that "Metcalf has voted for almost every piece of destructive environmental legislation," including "to weaken our clean air and clean water laws, and has supported legislation that would have prohibited the Environmental Protection Agency from enforcing food safety laws." The League of Conservation Voters gives him a 19 percent rating on environmental issues. By way of contrast, he gets a ringing 100 percent score from the Christian Coalition.
- The anti-whalers know that "moral compromise" is wrong
To great fanfare, Sea Shepherd posted a list of organizations that “maliciously misrepresent themselves as animal-friendly groups. Under no circumstances,” the posting opined, “should anyone support them.”
The offending groups:
Our personal favorite: “Any group with the word CONSEVATION (sic) EXCEPT Sea Shepherd Conservation Society”
(An interesting aside: Sea Shepherd posted the list as its own invention, but in reality, the list was copied verbatim from the Animals Deserve Absolute Protection Today and Tomorrow (ADAPTT) Newsletter. While we at CERTAIN realize that some of the groups listed above are 'pro-hunting' groups, there are many groups listed that have done FAR more for animals than Sea Shepherd histrionics have accomplished...long-term gains for animals rather than the short-sighted media-oriented mini-campaigns of Paul Watson and his group. CERTAIN has long made the point that many of Watson's 'directives' to anti-whalers are intended to line his pockets at the expense of other, more legitimate environmental organizations)
Clearly, then, these people are no strangers to the notion of “moral compromise” – supporting a group because it is politically expedient rather than morally correct. So, if the World Wildlife Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Council aren’t worthy of any support – what about Slade Gorton? Some of these groups are given the axe for their support of hunting – what about Jack Metcalf, himself a devoted hunter?
PAUL WATSON UPDATE
Leaders in the anti-whaling movement have exhibited racist attitudes and made racist statements. Any discussion of this must start with Paul Watson, head of Sea Shepherd. Many of his racist attitudes, actions and statements have been well-documented already, so I won’t duplicate that effort.
One of Watson’s most vile actions, though, is his claim of Lakota spirituality. This co-option of native culture – designed to offset the racist assaults on the Makah – is not only dishonest, it’s appalling.
For anyone not familiar with the story, Watson claims to have been a “medic” at Wounded Knee, to have been inducted into the Lakota nation by grateful Indians (an interesting variant on White "Friends of the Indian" arrogance - what would they have done without him?), and to have seen a “vision” interpreted by Lakota wicašawakan, or "holy man," Wallace Black Elk (nephew of Nicholas Black Elk, of Black Elk Speaks fame), which inspired him to stop any whale killing. Watson's assertions, particularly his claim to have come by his vision in the sweat lodge, caused some head-scratching (and some justified anger) among Wounded Knee veterans – none of whom could remember him – or anyone who has read Peter Matthiessen’s In The Spirit of Crazy Horse, the definitive history of the event, which mentions just about everyone involved – but curiously omits any mention of Watson.
Here are Watson’s claims, CERTAIN's responses to them, and how the claims have shifted through the years:
This is from the Stop Makah Whale Kill Home Page, Message #5387 (these messages are only available to members of the SWK list), also available at http://www.highnorth.no/guestbook/guests.htm.
“Date: Dec 16 1999 15:51:21 EST
From: Paul Watson (paulwatson@earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: [Watson] Re: What is the truth; I want to know
Dear Susan,
Normally I ignore the ravings of Jason Spaulding and his little group of hate mongers. But because you asked I will address these points.
1. I was indeed a medic - I worked out of the building designated as a hospital in Wounded Knee and I lived there during the occupation.
Ron "Doc" Rosen, who was in charge of the medics, has stated that Watson was not a medic.
2. I was never a warrior in the sense that I carried arms and I have never stated that I bore arms or participated in shooting at US forces. I was given the title of Warrior Brother by Dewey Braveheart and the Braveheart clan at Calico.
Carter Camp, Leonard Crow Dog, and a number of other Indians at Wounded Knee have all stated that no non-Indians were involved in the action as 'warriors,' at any time. Dewey Braveheart has not confirmed Watson's story.
3. I never stated that I ran through a hail of bullets to rescue Rocky Madrid. I was in fact with him when he was shot and I did assist in getting him back to the hospital.
Watson quoted directly from his own website (see below): "I was holding the other end of the stretcher when a U.S. Marshall's bullet struck down medic Rocky Madrid as we were running through a hail of lead."
4. I did assist Crow Dog when he removed the bullet and I was there in the room when he removed it.
Leonard Crow Dog has repeatedly stated that this is a falsehood.
5. I never said I was inducted into a warrior society named the Oglala Lakota Tribe. I dont knew where they get this shit. I was made a citizen of the Independent Oglala Nation of Wounded Knee at a ceremony in Wounded Knee attended by everyone. My Canadian passport was signed to this effect by Pedro Bissonette. I still have that passport.
First, Watson himself alleged that he had indeed been inducted as a "warrior brother" of the Oglala Sioux. Watson has failed to produce any evidence, even a scanned image, of the alleged passport with Pedro Bissonette's signature. Pedro, conveniently for Watson, is dead. Watson mistakenly calls the Oglala Sioux Tribe the "Oglala Lakota Tribe"; this is an interesting piece of business. In his first book, Sea Shepherd: My Fight for Whales & Seals, Watson stated that he was inducted into the "Oglala Sioux Tribe." OST is the actual name of the government on the Pine Ridge Reservation. At the time of Wounded Knee, that government was headed by the notorious Dickie Wilson, a man whose attitude toward 'traditionals' and AIM members was one of complete antagonism. Even if Crow Dog and Black Elk had 'made' Watson and his friend Dave Garrick members of the OST at Wounded Knee (they did not), Wilson would never have allowed them to be enrolled in the tribe as Watson states they were (I should add here that it helps to read all of Watson's books...you can watch the stories change as his egomania increases).
6. The vision did happen. I find it amusing that people who say they consider the vision ceremony to be sacred can be flippant about a vision and refer to it as a buffalo on a rope vision. It was my vision, my experience and quite frankly none of their business and not open to their criticisms. I find their attitude here to be disrespectful.
As a Crow Creek and Rosebud Sioux, I believe that Watson's claims regarding his so-called "vision" are very much within my purview. Watson is basically desecrating my religious beliefs with his phony claims. Persons who have had visions of the correct sort do not speak of them outside the lodge except privately to an elder. Beyond anything about propriety, though, is the fact that Watson's story about his "vision" changed significantly between 1982, when Sea Shepherd was written, and last year. The "buffalo on a rope" reference stems from the first major change Watson made in this story - initially, Watson claimed to have been confronted by a huge buffalo that spoke to him. He then changed the story to that of a harpooned buffalo, with a rope attached to the harpoon or arrow. The story changed over the years to the current lie.
7. Wallace Black Elk did indeed counsel me on this vision.
Wallace claims otherwise, and Watson's story really falls apart here. Wallace asked Ward Churchill (see below) why anyone would have been dumb enough to think that he'd equate the buffalo with whales, anyway... Visions are not interpreted by a sweat leader as a gypsy fortune teller would interpret a dream, as Watson implies. Without spilling any beans, it is more of a dynamic process like psychiatry. I have not met anyone who says that Watson's description of his vision/interpretation process
sounds even close to genuine... It is beyond credulity that a buffalo vision would refer to a whale or that a Lakota pipe carrier would refer to whales as "buffalo of the sea."
8. I am what I am. That was the title given and that is the title I use.
Watson's biggest and most easily harpooned lie is that he is entitled to call himself a "warrior brother" to the Oglala Lakota; this is another interesting quandary for him, because first, there's no such thing. One would be referred to as a 'warrior,' period. The word in our language is akicita, and it carries a lot more meaning than just 'fighter,' as it includes caring for the health of the community as a whole. Chopping wood, carrying water, etc. As well, there are a number of words for 'brother,' depending on the gender and relationship (older or younger) of the person speaking to the person spoken about. There is no generic word for 'brother'.
9. I never said my Lakota name was Gray Fox Clearwater. It is Grey Wolf Clear Water. The name was given to me before Frank Clearwater was killed and thus is not related to him at all.
Watson's own account places him (if he was even there) in Wounded Knee in March, 1973 (although at one time Watson placed the Wounded Knee occupation in 1975, mistaking it for the shootout at the Jumping Bull compound in Oglala, South Dakota, that resulted in Leonard Peltier's conviction), after, not before Frank Clearwater was killed. Under no circumstances would a non-Lakota, non-Indian have been given Clearwater's name. We have repeatedly asked Watson for the name in Lakota as it would have been given, and he has yet to answer. Another problem with this story is the first-name, last-name business. Lakota names don't work this way; the way Watson tells it, he and Garrick wound up with enough names for four people...it is more than coincidence that "Clearwater" was the name Pete Seeger had given to his Hudson sloop, which Watson had visited prior to WK '73.
This is the reality and these are the facts and those who wish to discredit them can do as they wish - the truth can stand on its own. I find it amusing that the F.B.I. has clear records of my involvement at Wounded Knee but my former allies are conviently forgetting. However my allegiance to the whales is stronger than any allegiance I have to any group of people so the accusations are not really that important to me. I only address them here because you requested some clarification.
Watson steadfastly refuses to allow access to his "FBI files" so that the truth of his words may be verified. The reality is that Watson is a liar, attempting to trod upon the memories of veterans of Wounded Knee to co-opt the "Indian voice."
Sincerely
Paul Watson”
But Watson used to say something quite different, in this excerpt copied verbatim from the Sea Shepherd website, called “Where is the Whales' Manifesto?: Sea Shepherd's Response to the Makah Manifesto”:
“A few weeks ago in Seattle, a sympathizer for the Makah's whaling initiative, demanding to know why I cared so much about four whales, yelled at me "Where were you when they were shooting Indians at Wounded Knee!?"
"I was there," I answered.
I received my life's mission to protect the great whales while serving as a medic for the American Indian Movement (AIM) at Wounded Knee, South Dakota, in 1973. I was holding the other end of the stretcher when a U.S. Marshall's bullet struck down medic Rocky Madrid as we were running through a hail of lead. I assisted Leonard Crow Dog in removing the bullet. I was made a warrior brother to the Oglala Lakota Nation and was given the name Gray Wolf Clearwater. In the sweat lodge ceremony, I had a vision, a dreamwherein an arrow struck a buffalo. The arrow had a long string attached to it. The buffalo asked for my help and I broke the string and chased the hunter away. Wallace Black Elk interpreted my dream. "Your mission is to help the buffalo of the sea - the whales," he said. "It will not be easy."”
Strangely enough, no one who was at Wounded Knee remembers him.
From Carter Camp, Wounded Knee veteran and AIM leader during that period:
"This past week I was with Crowdog and neither of us remember the events he outlined. Except the obvious--Rocky was shot, Crowdog operated, and people in the medic area helped. The medic people were purposely kept from any involvement outside their medical duties. This was at their own request to remain a neutral group. They did not participate in any 'activities' or any decisions, they carried no weapons and stayed separate, so if this guy was 'honored' or 'named,' the warriors missed it!
"Whatever he did (if he was there), I am deeply offended by his assertions that he was guided in his misdeeds by a 'vision' he was given at WK'73. We who were there would like to re-interpret his vision for him to show him the Makah, not eco-terrorists, are the ones saving our whale relatives. His view is insulting to those of us who fought at Wounded Knee '73 and more importantly it is insulting to the spirits of those buried there because of people like Watson himself. Maybe we could politely invite him to return to the Knee to Smoke once again with Rocky, Black Elk, Crowdog, and myself (I'm sure they will agree) so we can hear his 'vision' once again and give him the true meaning."
And this from Ward Churchill, Colorado AIM: "...it's not just that his name doesn't come up in any of the literature on Wounded Knee. I've queried Ron Rosen, who was in fact a medic at the Knee, and he doesn't remember Watson being there. Uncle Wallace [Black Elk] doesn't remember assigning any white guys to save a bunch of 'buffalo of the sea.' Neither Russ [Means] nor Aaron Two Elk recall Watson as having been there. Nobody recalls a naming ceremony being conducted for anyone, much less a white medic. Nobody remembers any white guys being naturalized as Oglala citizens, except the 7-member VVAW [Vietnam Veterans Against the War] contingent--White Bob, Hillbilly, et al.--and Watson was definitely not one of them."
The above can be found in a letter from Jim Page at http://eatthestate.org/03_39/Backtalk.htm
Now, Watson claims to be a great advocate of Indian interests -- so it’s interesting that he casts doubt on the well-documented threats experienced by native people. This letter appears on the SWK website:
“We hear stories of Native Americans being beaten and threatened but we have not been shown a shred of proof. The slaughter of the whale on the other hand was on national television and we saw the hands of the killers in action ... How do we know that the bomb threats to Native schools were not made by the people reported to have received them? Not a shred of evidence has been presented to the contrary.”
Watson also has a somewhat weird take on what racism is or is not:
“The truth is that racism is also an anthropocentric concept. A biocentrist is incapable of racism because a biocentrist knows that there is only one species, and all its cultural components are equally screwed up, having in common the same virtues and vices with vices outnumbering virtues by three to one.” Evidently, by the same logic, there would be no problems with sexism, homophobia or ethnocentrism in the “biocentrist” movement. And all of us associated with that movement know how true that is.
These are quite interesting views coming from a self-professed champion of indigenous interests.
We hope at least some of this information is fresh and/or helpful. All the original documentation is available on-line; if interested in obtaining any of it, please e-mail us at certain-natl@certain-natl.org, phone us at 520-370-7136, or write us at:
CERTAIN - Coalition to End Racial
Targeting of American Indian Nations
3400 E. Speedway Blvd., Suite 259
Tucson AZ 85716-3953
.
