We've had enough of unconcerned attorneys, bullying by pompous township officials, and political juggling. We're tired of the white man's ignorance of our religious beliefs and persecution of our ancestral beliefs. We are FULLY backed by AIM Pennsylvania, 99% of the area residents, and concerned brothers and sisters.

Although the case citations, court game plan and evidence is well in hand, we welcome any comments, suggestions, or questions.

We will not buckle down to live the white man's ways or be ruled by tyranny.

Wanishi and Wopila to all of you for your past support. We'll keep you informed.

According to Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886) (USSC+)

• In a suit brought to this court from a State court which involves the constitutionality of ordinances made by a municipal corporation in the State, this court will, when necessary, put its own independent construction upon the ordinances.

• It was alleged in the petition, that your petitioner... is greatly impaired, and in many cases practically ruined, by this system of oppression to one kind of men and favoritism to all others.

• ...the right to carry on this...[activity] is not made to depend upon any prescribed conditions giving a right to anybody complying with them, but upon the consent or arbitrary will of the board of supervisors.

• And if, by an ordinance, general in its terms and form like the one in question, by reserving an arbitrary discretion in the enacting body to grant or deny permission to engage in a proper and necessary calling, a discrimination against any class can be made in its execution, thereby evading and, in effect, nullifying the provisions of the National Constitution, then the insertion of provisions to guard the rights of every class and person in that instrument was a vain and futile act.

• They seem intended to confer, and actually do confer, not a discretion to be exercised upon a consideration of the circumstances of each case, but a naked and arbitrary power to give or withhold consent not only as to places, but as to persons. So that, if an applicant for such consent, being in every way a competent and qualified person and having complied with every reasonable condition demanded by any public interest, should, failing to obtain the requisite consent of the supervisors to the prosecution of his business, apply for redress by the judicial process of mandamus to require the supervisors to consider and act upon his case, it would be a sufficient answer for them to say that the law had conferred upon them authority to withhold their assent without reason and without responsibility.

• The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens. It says:

  Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

  These provisions are universal in their application to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality, and the equal protection of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal laws. It is accordingly enacted by 1977 of the Revised Statutes, that all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.

• When we consider the nature and the theory of our institutions of government, the principles upon which they are supposed to rest, and review the history of their development, we are constrained to conclude that they do not mean to leave room for the play and action of purely personal and arbitrary power.

• ...the fundamental rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, considered as individual possessions, are secured by those maxims of constitutional law which are the monuments showing the victorious progress of the race in securing to men the blessings of civilization under the reign of just and equal laws, so that, in the famous language of the Massachusetts Bill of Rights, the government of the commonwealth "may be a government of laws, and not of men."

In March, 1995 Dennis Blackhawk, Lenape, returned to his hometown, Weatherly, Pennsylvania. He had just resigned from his job as a BIA policeman at Pine Ridge because he was tired of hearing his professional peers brag regarding their relationship with Dick Wilson's GOONS (Guardians of the Oglala Nation) during the Wounded Knee seige of '73.

With Dennis came three foxes, two raccoons, one peacock, one peahen, a domesticated ferret, and two black bear cubs. Dennis first enountered the bear cubs at a game farm in Minnesota in 1994. The encounter with the cubs was peculiar because since he was a child he had experienced a recurring dream in which two bear cubs walked in circles around him.

The cubs and Dennis took to each other and, rather than see them be shipped off to a zoo or medical experiment station, he purchased the cubs. They had been declawed by the game farm and could not be released to the wild. It appeared that his dream had come to life.

Dennis and his companions returned to Weatherly and, with his wife Debra, a homestead was set-up on three acres of land. Pens were built for the animals which exceeded anything required by the state or federal government. All relevant permits were in order. They settled in...they were happy.

In September of 1995 Dennis petitioned the Lehigh Township Board of Supervisors to house wildlife on their property. The petition was necessary because the property is zoned R-1, residential. The request was denied.

Dennis asked the Board to reconsider inasmuch as State and Federal permits have certified that he legally certified to house his animals. Both the State and Federal Government state that he is licensed to operate a "sanctuary dedicated to preserving wildlife." The Zoning Board said no.

Now things start to get sticky...it just so happens that the Township Supervisor Frank Raynock has built pens for deer on "his" land which is also zoned R 1, residential. No permits have been issued for these deer. No violations have been issued by the Township for these deer...and the Supervisor can not be reached for comment.

As a result of Blackhawk's push for his permit he is now being harassed by the Township as they allege that he was never granted permission to "live" on his property...this, all of a sudden, after two years!

Please refer back to the excerpts from the Supreme Court decision at the top of this page...what is good for the Township Supervisor, Frank Raynock, appears not to be good for Dennis Blackhawk. This must be underlined and corrected as soon as possible!

In order to bring this imbalance to light, and to help Dennis with his fight for justice, your email support is needed. Please fill out the input form below...your "comments" will have the most impact...thank you for any attention you can give to this issue