THE 10 MOST FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NAVAJO - HOPI LAND DISPUTE WITH A REBUTTAL BY AL SWILLING FOUNDER OF SENAA
Question: What exactly is this
so-called dispute?
Answer. The history of the dispute spans
more than 100 years and involves numerous
pieces of Congressional legislation and court
cases. In essence, it the 1880's the federal
government set aside 2.2 million acres, or
roughly 3,450 square miles of an area larger
than the State of Delaware, for the Hopi
Indians and such other Indians as the
government might settle thereon. At that
time, the Navajo Reservation was many miles
to the east. Over the years, Navajos moved
westward and the Navajo Reservation was
enlarged several time until it surrounded the
Hopi Reservation and encompassed more than 15
million acres, or 23,500 square miles or and
area the size of West Virginia or Ireland.
(The Navajo Reservation is larger than many
European countries such as Switzerland,
Belgium and Denmark.)
The Navajos began to use the Hopi
Reservation almost to the total exclusion of
the Hopi Tribe. Beginning in 1958, Congress
passed legislation authorizing the Hopi Tribe
to adjudicate its rights in the land in the
federal courts. Ultimately, the courts
determined both tribes had rights in the land
and that the best solution to the competing
claims was to "partition" or divide the land
between the two tribes. The land was divided
into the Hopi Partitioned Land (HPL) and the
Navajo Partitioned Land (NPL). Thus, the
dispute over ownership to the land has been
resolved. The remaining dispute is how to
move the Navajos living on the HPL onto
Navajo lands. (Few Hopis lived on the NPL and
those that did voluntarily move to the HPL
after the land was
partitioned.)
REBUTTAL:
Here, the BIA is counting
on those who read its response not knowing
the history of the Dine'h, because they are
not telling the whole story. Important key
information has been omitted from their
version of the story. Refuting this response
requires a brief look at history. Once the
history is known, it becomes obvious that the
BIA response above is a half truth, not a
lie, but clearly a deception geared at
portraying the BIA as benevolent and kind and
the Dine'h and Hopi as being ungrateful and
childish. When all the facts are known, a
completely different picture emerges.
The truth is, when explorers first
encountered the Hopi and Dine'h (Navajo),
they were living at the four corners area and
occupied much of what is now New Mexico and
Arizona, extending into what is now Colorado
and Utah. From the 1500s to the 1800s, the
Hopi and Dine'h coexisted peacefully in the
area that the BIA says is now the center of
conflict between the two tribes.
The first discord in Dine'h and Hopi
territory was with the Spanish, who tried to
take over the area but were driven out by the
Hopi and Dine'h. The subsequent U.S. Mexican
War concluded with the Treaty of Guadeloupe
Hidalgo, in which Mexico ceded the Southwest,
which it did not rightfully own to cede, to
the U.S., which agreed never to remove the
Native peoples.
The next crisis for the Hopi and Dine'h
came with the California Gold Rush, when the
U.S. declared war on the Navajo because they
were, in essence, in the way of the greedy
prospectors and settlers hoping to strike it
rich in California. On the heels of the Civil
War, in 1863-64, Colonel Kit Carson, on
contract with the U.S., destroyed Dine'h
crops and livestock and forced all captured
Dine'h on the infamous 400 mile trek known as
"The Long Walk" to Fort Sumner in New Mexico.
Thousands died in on the walk and the
survivors were held in captivity in
concentration camps whence Hitler received
his inspiration for the Nazi concentration
camps where so many Jews were tortured and
murdered.
It was Carson's intention to annihilate
the Hopi and Dine'h, but starvation and
intolerable conditions forced the Dine'h to
agree to the 1868 Navajo Treaty, whereby the
Dine'h were released and "given" a 3.5
million acre reservation in northwestern New
Mexico--a fraction of the size of their
original homeland.
Afterward, in 1871, the U.S. moved the
department of "Indian Affairs" from the War
Department to the Department of the Interior
and changed its tactics of dealing with
Indigenous Americans from worthless treaties
and open genocide to education. The logic was
to educate the culture out of the First
Americans. Dine'h and children of other
Indigenous Nations were forcibly removed from
their homes and placed in "Indian Schools,"
where they were forbidden to speak their
native language, wear their hair as they
pleased, practice their religion, or do
anything connected with their traditional
culture. If the U.S. government could not
kill the Dine'h physically, then it would
kill them spiritually. The Dine'h resisted.
Between 1878 and 1882, the Dine'h gained
back a portion of their original homeland
when the U.S. government, to accommodate the
growth of the tribe and respond to their
grazing needs, expanded the Navajo
reservation into Arizona. However, as the
Navajo were expanding and gaining back some
of their traditional homeland, the Hopi, who
had never signed a treaty with nor
surrendered to the U.S. government, were
beginning to suffer at the hands of the U.S.
government.
In 1882, President Chester A. Arthur
signed an Executive Order proclaiming that an
area of one degree latitude by one degree
longitude in northeastern Arizona would be
the Hopi Reservation of approximately 3.5
million acres, which did not correlate with
Hopi occupancy. In 1884, Hopi religious
leaders wrote to the President challenging
his authority to prescribe any boundaries on
the Hopi. This action placed many of the Hopi
sacred sites outside the U.S. government
imposed Hopi boundaries. Likewise, it put
many Dine'h sacred sites inside Hopi
boundaries, making them, by U.S. standards,
inaccessible. Dine'h and Hopi ignored, to
some extent, the U.S. government imposed
boundaries which had resulted in many Dine'h
living on what the U.S. government considered
Hopi land and many Hopi living on Navajo
land.
As the Dine'h and Hopi were dealing with
this newest twist of the knife, the search
for oil, gas, and other natural resources
began. Between 1905 and 1923, geological
surveys revealed the wealth of natural
resources on Dine'h and Hopi land. Mining
companies pressured the U.S. government to
grant them the authority to negotiate
contracts and leases with the Dine'h and Hopi
so they could exploit the vast resources. In
1923, at Standard Oil Company's bidding, the
United States government, through the
Department of the Interior's Bureau of Indian
Affairs (BIA) and against the will of the
Dine'h people, formed the first "Navajo
Tribal Council." The only action that the
council was allowed to take was to authorize
an Indian Agent to sign mineral leases in the
Navajo Tribal Council's name.
Thus begins plans by the BIA and mining
companies to create a diversion and fabricate
a "land dispute" between the Hopi and Dine'h
in order to give the government an excuse to
step in and settle a conflict that only
existed between the Hopi and Dine'h on the
Tribal Council level, not among the Hopi and
Dine'h people. The Hopi and Dine'h were
crying out in protest; but the protests of
the people were directed at the BIA and the
mining companies, not among themselves. They
had always shared the area as their home and
sacred lands, it was no different at this
time; but the gears of the U.S. government
and the mining companies were in motion, and
there would be no stopping them.
In response to the 1934 Indian
Reorganization Act, Secretary of the Interior
Harold Ickes formed the Hopi Tribal Council
amid the strong resistance of traditional
people. With Ickes' establishment of nineteen
grazing districts on the Hopi and Navajo
reservations, he declared that District 6, an
area immediately surrounding Hopi villages,
was exclusively Hopi. Seven years later, in
1943, District 6 was enlarged to 631,000
acres, and Dine'h within the new boundaries
were forced to move.
Between 1946 and 1951, the Hopi people
had boycotted the puppet Hopi Tribal Council
out of existence; but it was reinstated in
1951 by Peabody attorney, Hopi Tribal
Councilman, and former Mormon Archbishop,
John Boyden. From 1952 to 1957, attorneys
Boyden and Normal Littell (Navajo Tribal
Council attorney) petitioned the Secretary of
the Interior to partition lands outside
District 6. In the meantime, Kerr-McGee
opened a uranium mill on Dine'h land.
In 1962, a federal court upheld the 1943
Hopi boundaries, saying that only Congress
has the power to partition land. The court
ruled that the balance of the reservation
established in 1882 had to be shared equally
by the Hopi and Dine'h. This became the Joint
Use Area (JUA).
In 1963, Vanadium Corporation bought the
uranium mill from Kerr-McGee. Approximately
1.5 million tons of ore were processed and
left in contaminated waste piles covering 72
acres next to the San Juan River near
Shiprock, NM. Two years later, Secretary of
the Interior Stewart Udall begins work on a
plan to develop water and mineral resources
in the Southwest.
In 1966, ignoring the objections of Hopi
traditional and spiritual leaders, the Hopi
Tribal Council grants 35 year lease to
Peabody Coal Company to develop Black Mesa.
Between 1971 and 1974, the Navajo-Hopi
Land Settlement Act (PL93-531) became law.
Several Arizona Congressmen and Lawyers
convinced the rest of Congress that the "Land
Dispute" had become a bloody "Range War."
This came as a shock to Navajo and Hopi on
the JUA, but Congress trusted its Western
Colleagues and they signed into Law the
Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act, dividing the
JUA into Navajo and Hopi halves and
ostensibly, solving the problem.
There followed a 50/50 partition of the
lands, with the boundary to be confirmed by
District Court, 90% livestock reduction; and
a Relocation Commission to implement removal
of Indians living on the "wrong side of the
fence" was established. This also represented
the beginning of home repair and home
construction freeze.
It is a widely held belief that the
Dispute was contrived by Government sponsored
and styled tribal council and influential
energy interests whose sole intent was to
clear up coal and water rights on the JUA,
and open the way for more rapid energy
development. Vast quantities of oil, uranium
and coal were involved.
For the timeline of these
developments, see the chronology: URL:
http://www.applicom.com/vbm/Chron.htm
REBUTTAL: Black Mesa Coal Mine (URL:
http://www.solcommunications.com/) This Is
What The U.S. Government Wanted With the Land
At Black Mesa.
REBUTTAL:
Rebuttal by Al Swilling, SENAA.
---------------------------------------------
-
126 days to the final solution for the
Dine'h at Big Mountain, AZ, USA. See the
video "Vanishing Prayers" URL:
http://www.free
WANT TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE DINE'H AND THEIR STRUGGLES? THEN VISIT THESE LINKS
Click Here For A Chronology Of The Dine'h and Hopi Peoples Prepared By Marsha Monestersky
Question: I have heard
that there really is no dispute, that the
Navajos and Hopis get along just fine with
each other. Is this true?
REBUTTAL:
I am unfamiliar with the
religious beliefs of either the Hopi or the
Dine'h nation. However, I do know that both
tribes are, by nature, peaceful people. I
also know that, for hundreds of years before
the U.S. government or the BIA existed, and
for hundreds of years prior to European
contact, the Hopi and Dine'h lived together
in peace in the Southwest, in and around the
four corners area. The rather lame argument
that the reason for the so-called "land
dispute" is that "The tribes have profound
political and legal differences" does not
stand up under close scrutiny. In fact,
though there probably are some differences in
the spiritual beliefs of the Hopi and Dine'h,
there are as many similarities. For example,
almost every Indigenous American nation on
the continent believes that the earth is our
Mother and Creator is our Divine Father. We
share the belief that Creator put each of our
nations on this Turtle Island in the
particular places that were best suited for
each of us. We share the belief that we were
put in our particular homeland to be
caretakers of that land, and that is the way
Creator intended for it to be. Those common
beliefs, no matter how their other beliefs
may differ, are exactly why the Hopi and
Dine'h were able and willing to co-exist in
the same area for so many centuries.
The beliefs of the Lakota probably differ
from the Hopi and Dine'h beliefs far more
than the Hopi and Dine'h beliefs differ from
each other; yet each year since it began, the
Lakota and other tribes have been allowed to
come to Hopi and Dine'h land and perform the
Sundance ritual. In spite of the vast
differences among the three cultures, the
Hopi and Dine'h recognize the profound
spiritual commitment and power that are
involved. They realize and accept that the
differences among them fade into
insignificance compared to the faith and
commitment to Creator that the rituals
demonstrate. To each person, truth is
revealed in a way that he or she can best
understand it and in ways that are best
suited to his or her nature. The Dine'h and
the Hopi understand that. If, then, they are
tolerant of a people who are as different
from them as the Lakota are, how much more
tolerant would they be toward each other who
have so much in common. Among their common
religious beliefs is the recognition that
certain places in their homeland are sacred.
The Hopi and Dine'h respect each other's holy
places and, from what I have learned from
various sources, even hold some sacred sites
in common.
The only "land dispute" is that illusion
of dispute that was created by the U.S.
government through puppet tribal councils
that the U.S. itself created. The Hopi and
Navajo Tribal Councils were not created by or
in the interests of the Hopi or Dine'h
people, as my earlier rebuttal clearly
explains.
This matter is one of common sense more
than documentation. The entire BIA comment is
ludicrous.
Question: Isn't this
merely another attempt by the government
to take land from the Indians?
Answer. The United States
was not a party to the litigation to
partition the land. The litigation was
brought by the Hopi Tribe against the Navajo
Nation and the land was divided between the
two tribes. The federal government gained no
land from the litigation. In fact, the
federal government has given the Navajo
Nation 250,000 acres of "new land" and
provided funding to the Hopi Tribe to acquire
up to 150,000 additional acres of land.
The petition for partitioning of the land
was not a matter of Hopi vs. Navajo. In 1947,
attorneys Boyden and Littell were hired as
claims attorneys for the Hopi and Navajo
Tribal Councils respectively. Boyden, at the
time, was also an attorney for Peabody Coal
Company. It should be noted that Boyden first
sought employment with the Navajo Tribal
Council; but Littell was chosen for that
position, so Boyden was hired as the Hopi
Tribal Council's attorney. It was the two
attorneys together who petitioned federal
courts to partition the Hopi land. Together,
they convinced Congress that the Hopi and
Navajo were engaged in a bloody range war and
that partitioning (fencing) the land was the
only solution to the problem. It was the BIA,
remember, who was formulating strategies and
pulling the strings. There was no range war,
and the only protests were those raised by
both Hopi and Dine'h against the BIA and the
two tribal councils for displacing them. The
hidden agenda was to give Congress the
illusion of a conflict over the JUA, get
control of the area turned over to the BIA
and the Tribal Councils, then, on the ruse
that it was in the best interest of both
tribes, sign the mineral rights over to
Peabody Coal Company. It worked, and the Hopi
and Dine'h people have been paying the price
ever since.
If the United States is not a party to
the litigation to partition the land, then
where did PL93-531 in 1974 and the
Navajo-Hopi Land Dispute Settlement Act of
1996 come from?
The facts of the matter are that the
Congress of the United States created both
the Hopi and Navajo Tribal Councils and they
were created for ONE purpose only: to sign
over mineral rights to the Hopi and Dine'h
lands, not for the land itself, but for the
mineral deposits in the land. It was also the
United States Congress that formulated and
passed the Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act
(PL93-531) in 1974 and the Navajo-Hopi Land
Dispute Settlement Act of 1996. It was United
States Presidents who signed both bills into
law. It was the BIA and rangers from the
puppet Hopi Tribal Council who ordered the
fencing off of the HPL. It is the BIA, a
department of the United States government,
that is trying to force the Dine'h off their
land and onto the "new land," which the BIA
fails to mention is contaminated with uranium
waste that is giving off radiation at levels
up to 100 times maximum safe levels.
Question: If the Navajos
have to move off Hopi lands, where are
they supposed to go and what provisions have
been made to assist them?
Answer. The Navajo Nation
is more than 15 million acres and the federal
government has provided an additional 250,000
acres specifically for relocation purposes.
Many Navajos have chosen to relocate to the
main Navajo Reservation and many have moved
to the "new lands." Some Navajos has chosen
not to move to the "new land" and have been
relocated to communities in the surrounding
area or out of state. Before any Navajo
moves, the federal government provides them
with water, electricity and a new home. Thus,
far, the federal government has spent over
One-half billion dollars to assist Navajos in
relocating.
REBUTTAL:
The "new lands," as I have pointed out,
are contaminated by uranium tailings, "one of
the most toxic substances known to man," as
the narrator points out in the video
VANISHING PRAYER Genocide of the Dineh.
Levels of contamination have been measured at
100 times the maximum safe level. Not only is
the land itself contaminated, the water of
nearby streams is contaminated, as well. Of
those who were first relocated to "new
lands," 25 percent died within the first six
years. Since moving to "new lands," the birth
defect rate among those people has risen to
twice the national average.
The Dine'h at Big Mountain are not just
being told to move. They are being told to
move from their sacred ancestral homeland
onto land that is so polluted from uranium
waste that it will literally kill them. Death
by radiation related disease is sometimes
slow, but it is always fatal and always
agonizing. If the Dine'h do not move, they
are denied water and electricity, and are
forbidden to repair or rebuild their homes.
So much for the BIA's benevolence.
Question: What happens to those
Navajos that don't want to relocate?
Answer. The Hopi and Navajo
residents of the HPL have spent years in
federal court ordered mediation negotiating
"Accommodation Agreements," whereby the Hopi
Tribe has agreed to accommodate the continued
residence by Navajos on the HPL. In essence,
these Accommodation Agreements are long term
leases (75 years) with an option to renew at
the end of the 75 years.
REBUTTAL:
The "Accommodation Agreements" were
created by the BIA run Tribal Councils, not
by the Hopi people. The Dine'h are being told
to sign leases to allow them to remain on
ancestral sacred land given to them by the
Creator. The question is, how can the U.S.
government, through its puppet tribal
council, impose a lease on land that was
given to them by the Creator?
Question: I have heard
that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
is stealing or impounding Navajo sheep. Why
is the BIA doing this?
Answer. As part of the
litigation in the Navajo-Hopi dispute, the
BIA was ordered by the courts to maintain the
range and ensure that it is not being over
grazed. Many Navajos had historically over
grazed the range and severely damaged it.
Several years ago, the BIA initiated a
purchase program whereby it purchased excess
Navajo animals. Thereafter, on an annual
basis, the BIA has issued grazing permits to
the Navajo HPL residents. These permits
specify how many animals each Navajo family
can graze on the HPL. If a family is grazing
animals in excess of their permit they are
notified of this fact and asked to remove the
excess animals. If they are not removed with
a reasonable time, the BIA must impound
excess animals in order to ensure that the
range is not over grazed and to comply with
the orders of the court.
Isn't it odd that, for hundreds of years
before coal, oil, uranium, and other
exploitable natural resources were discovered
and Peabody Coal Company and the U.S.
government came into the picture, the Dine'h
have grazed sheep on that land and have done
very well at it all by themselves. Then, when
the mining companies wanted the land and the
U.S. government created the Hopi and Navajo
Tribal Councils, the Dineh suddenly forgot
everything they ever knew about caring for
their flocks and the land that sustains them,
making it necessary for the U.S. government
to step in and take over range management.
You must remember, too, that the BIA's
reference to Hopi is in reference to the Hopi
Tribal Council, not to the Hopi people
themselves. The Hopi successfully boycotted
and dismantled the Hopi Tribal Council once.
It was the BIA who resurrected it to protect
the mining interests, not to help the Hopi
people.
The first question that comes to mind in
regard to impoundment is: If Dine'h livestock
are being impounded because of overgrazing,
then why does the BIA turn around, after the
impoundment, and offer to sell the animals
back to the rightful owners? These practices
are tantamount to kidnapping and extortion
and bear little resemblance to range
management.
Question: Are Navajos
allowed to graze animals if they have
signed an Accommodation Agreement?
Answer. Yes. After years
of negotiations the Hopi Tribe and the HPL
Navajos agreed that the HPL Navajos were
entitled to graze 2,800 sheep units on the
HPL, which is approximately 2 times the
number previously permitted. (Sheep units are
a way to measure use of the range. For
example, a cow eats approximately 5 times as
much as a sheep. Thus, one cow equals five
sheep units. Navajos can graze a variety of
animals as long as the total does not exceed
2,800 sheep units.) The HPL Navajos decide
among themselves how to allocate their
grazing rights.
REBUTTAL:
The fact is, the entire concept of range
management was created and implemented by the
BIA controlled Hopi Tribal Council. The BIA
is being deliberately misleading in referring
to the actions of the Tribal Council as being
those of the "Hopi Tribe." As document upon
document written by eyewitnesses to the
unfolding saga will attest, there is no
conflict between the traditional Hopi and the
Dine'h traditional people. A look at the
history of the Hopi and Navajo Tribal
Councils; the protests of the people at the
BIA's creation of these puppet,
nonrepresentative councils; and the chain of
events that followed the results of
geological surveys will make clear just who
is controlling the situation, what the
ulterior motives of the BIA are, and the
truth about why the Dine'h livestock are
being impounded, mistreated, starved, and
held for ransom at the BIA impoundment yards.
Question: If the
Navajos have signed Accommodation Agreements
why is the BIA presently impounding Navajo
animals?
Answer. The Accommodation
Agreements authorize the HPL Navajos to graze
2,800 sheep units. They were, however, at the
beginning of the year grazing in excess of
3,600 sheep units. In addition, the HPL is an
arid area and is currently experiencing a
dryer than normal year. As a consequence the
carrying capacity of the range has been
reduced to 2,300 sheep units. In dry times,
prudent range management requires a reduction
in the number of livestock grazed. In this
case, there has been a pro rata reduction in
the number of animals that both the HPL
Navajos and members of the Hopi Tribe can
graze on the HPL.
REBUTTAL: The Black Mesa area is, indeed, an arid
area. There is little water to be had and
every drop is precious to all flora and fauna
living in the area. Situations such as these
are why federal laws, on paper at least,
forbid mining companies from using
nonreplenishable water sources for mining
purposes unless the mining company has the
ability to replace the water that it uses.
The reason that the Black Mesa area is
experiencing dryer than normal seasons is
because Peabody Coal Company continues to run
its 270 mile slurry line to the Mojave
Generating Station, draining billions of
gallons of pristine water from the aquifer
that lies beneath Black Mesa, the only source
of water for the Hopi and Dine'h living at
Black Mesa.
Rather than punish Peabody Coal Company
and demand restitution for violating federal
mining laws, the U.S. government has
responded by capping the wells of the Dine'h
at Black Mesa and forbidding them to draw
water from them. Without water, the ability
to maintain their sheep is diminished
dramatically. Water in the nearest streams is
contaminated by toxins from the mining
process, which has killed many of the Dine'h
sheep.
In the grand scheme of things, the U.S.
government has no intention of punishing
Peabody Coal Company or stopping it from
using the nonreplenishable water from the
aquifer. Peabody's mining operation is
closing in on the Big Mountain area, where
the Dine'h live. It wants to clear the way so
it can strip mine Big Mountain and destroy
yet another Dine'h sacred site. It is the BIA
operated Hopi Tribal Council, and NOT the
Hopi people who are trying to remove the
Dine'h, whether they have signed an
Accommodation Agreement or not. To accomplish
this task, the BIA has begun harassing them,
threatening them, and confiscating their
livestock, saying that they are overgrazing
when they are not.
For testimony about livestock
impoundments, visit L.I.S.N. URL:
http://www.lisn.net/bigmountain3.htm
Question: Is it true the
Navajos have been threatened and
assaulted in order to try and make them sign
an Accommodation Agreement or move from the
HPL?
Answer. There are no
documented instances of Navajos having been
threatened or assaulted. Some non-Indian
supports of the HPL Navajos allege that
explaining the law to the HPL Navajos
constitutes threats and intimidation. In
recognition of the sensitive nature of
relocation, as part of the mediation process
leading to the Accommodation Agreement
process Navajo tribal members agreed to make
contact with the HPL Navajos to explain the
terms of the Accommodation Agreements and to
answer questions. The process has been very
successful as the majority of the HPL Navajos
have signed the Accommodation Agreement. The
only people that have, in fact, been
assaulted and injured have been BIA and Hopi
tribal employees.
REBUTTAL:
Rena Babbitt Lane, who lost livestock in
a confiscation on Monday, February 22, had
her hand broken when she tried to stop a
previous impoundment.
As the photo clearly shows, there have,
indeed, been assaults on the Dine'h, and a
policy of terrorism and threats is very real
and it continues today. Aside from assaults
on Dine'h, those who try to prevent the
impoundment of their livestock, the Dine'h
have been terrorized and mistreated in a
number of other ways:
Wells have been capped, firewood and wood
cutting tools have been confiscated and the
Dine'h have been forbidden to gather firewood
or even break a green twig. The Dine'h have
also been threatened with exclusion orders,
had eviction notices nailed to their doors,
forbidden to repair their homes or build any
shelter. One Dine'h had his hogan bulldozed
to the ground by the BIA. Assault and threats
can take many forms, and the Dine'h have
experienced most of them at the hands of the
BIA, aka the "Hopi Tribal Council," aka the
"Navajo Tribal Council."
For in-depth articles, written by
eyewitnesses to the BIA's brutality and
underhanded tactics against the Dine'h at Big
Mountain, click the "BACK" button below to go
back to SENAA's Newsletter page. Click on the
links to the various articles and see what
eyewitnesses saw. Learn for yourself the
truth about the BIA's part in this tragedy
and what they don't want you to know about
what is REALLY going on at Black Mesa at the
BIA's hands. 
Great Sight About the Dine'h, Hopi and U'wa Peoples
Click Here For More Information About Black Mesa and How You Can Help
