John Trimbach
John Trimbach responds to Stew Magnuson
By John Trimbach I recently received a phone call from former Wounded Knee resident, JoAnn Feraca, daughter of Clive and Agnes Gildersleeve. JoAnn was concerned that another self-anointed author was writing about the destruction of her village, and getting it wrong. “Stew Magnuson,” JoAnn said, “does not know Wounded Knee.” After reading her copy of Magnuson’s book, I agree. “Still Bleeding” has the look and feel of a rushed deadline, with an assortment of Wounded Knee distortions, innuendo, and falsehoods, packaged as self-reported history with clever phrases. Magnuson, for example, falsely writes that at the Wounded Knee conference last year, I claimed that victim Buddy Lamont was hit by a “stray” bullet. Perhaps he was daydreaming when I implicated Dennis Banks in Lamont’s demise, with what was certainly not a stray bullet. Magnuson confuses Buddy Lamont with another Wounded Knee casualty, Frank Clear. I wrote and read out loud my scripted presentation so I would not be misquoted by another amateur reporter, but I guess that didn’t work. And contrary to Magnuson’s malicious allegation, my father does not hate anyone. I, on the other hand, tend to look down on disingenuous opportunists who pretend to know what they’re talking about. Frankly, I don’t care if Magnuson calls himself a “Wounded Knee historian,” based on attending a three-day conference, or that he injects his opinions when they conflict with the facts, or that he lifted information from American Indian Mafia without proper attribution, but his readers, and certainly the real victims of Wounded Knee, deserve better than conflicted hodgepodge in booklet form. For those interested in knowing what people actually said at the conference, they can watch the first presentation and find links for the others here: twiturl.us/cwswkconf Magnuson’s readers might also be interested in knowing that earlier this year, I responded to one of his taunts, which included this odd defense of AIM killers: “[The Trimbachs] will use the flimsiest of evidence to drag anyone’s name into the mud. But ask Joe an uncomfortable question about the FBI back then and it’s: “Don't know. Wasn't there.” This is indeed curious coming from an author who bases his conclusions on scribbled notes and superficial research. At the time he wrote these comments, Magnuson had not read our book and was completely uninformed about our criticism of the Bureau, the Department of Justice, and the White House. But following my presentation, during the Q and A, Magnuson demanded answers about J. Edgar Hoover, who was dead when Wounded Knee erupted; funny how Stew could not summon the same “outrage” when confronting the people responsible for the murder of Anna Mae Aquash. Stew, the questions you aimed at my father said a lot more about your lack of professionalism than it did about his ability to instantly recall the answers you were expecting. Interestingly, his response about the number of informants inside Wounded Knee village evidently exceeded your capacity to understand it. Were you under the impression that informants were somehow to blame for the village violence? There were, in fact, no informants inside Wounded Knee, just as he said, unless you count Agnes Gildersleeve, who made frantic phone calls after her home was invaded by armed intruders, or her neighbors who tried to enlighten Justice Department officials that an AIM gun in the closet, when the cameras were rolling, was just as terrifying as having one in your face after the government big shots left for the day. There were also the occasional AIM and non-AIM insiders, some of whom grew increasingly alarmed at what was going on behind the scenes, who provided FBI agents and US Marshals with useful information. There was an FBI agent who posed as an electrician, and tried to get a read on the potential for violence that could have erupted at any moment inside the village, and as we discovered, often did. A concerned AP photographer provided FBI agents with his estimation of the weaponry he saw. Was he an informant? There was Douglas Durham who, acting on his own, spent a few hours inside the village and who later became the FBI’s most crucial AIM informant before his cover was blown in March 1975. You see, Stew, my father’s answer had a lot more thought behind it than what you put into your gotcha questions, just as the complexities of Wounded Knee are due more consideration than scatter-shot comments meant to impress, but only reveal ignorance. Let’s be honest, Stew. You could have asked for a sit-down interview, which my father would have gladly given and during which you might have learned something beyond your current state of Wounded Knee knowledge. You chose the low road, much like your predecessor, Steve Hendricks, whose book you shamefully endorsed before you knew what you were doing. I’m not sure you do now. Your statement, "Joe Trimbach believes the agency did no wrong, if you can get him to talk about it at all," is another gutless jab that merely emphasizes what you have in common with scores of self-anointed “experts” who have never even read American Indian Mafia yet feel qualified to comment on it. How would you even know what an “uncomfortable question” about Wounded Knee is? This smells like somebody who is trying to sound informed but isn't. So does this: ‘In fact, other than one left-wing professor, I don’t recall ever meeting any non-member, white, Native American, or otherwise, who had anything good to say about the [AIM] organization in the 1970s.’ You need to get out more, Stew, start by picking up just about any encyclopedia; look under “A.” Seriously, why should anyone interested in becoming informed about Wounded Knee ’73 put their faith in cheap-shot grandstanding and surface-skimmed examination? (Or in someone who wonders if Anna Mae Aquash’s killers lawyered up and clammed up?) Is it any wonder Leonard Peltier has a following in a world where opinion and bluster pass for honest research? Whether you realize it or not, Stew, you provided the audience in Sioux Falls an example of why the history books are so unbelievably skewed in favor of rapists and murderers masquerading as Native American heroes. Honest research and debate should have been Magnuson's goal. Here’s hoping his book does not do more historical harm than good. John Trimbach
americanindianmafia.com
aimmythbusters.com Copyright permission by Native Sun News
Join the Conversation
