I am by no means an expert on the incident or either sides point of view.  But as someone who has grown up on the reservations of South Dakota and who pays attention to the world at large I think this is a very biased article.  Everyone is discussing AIM's side and the role of the government in the incident but no one is putting in the view points of the actual residents of South Dakota.  I am not native but many of my friends and family are.  I see AIM in the same way as I assume many people in a variety of countries see their uprising residents on the national news.  The citizens screaming and calling for justice may not be speaking for the population as a whole; but they are the ones that make the news.  I think before you guys make opinions based on what the media tells you; you should find out if the average tribal member agrees with Russel Means or Leonard Peltier.  You should also research how much time they actually spent on the reservation.  Again I am no expert but from what I know growing up here is that AIM and many others like them were extreme liberals that were not necessarily speaking for the society at large.  I just feel that this is similiar as basing views of the Muslim world based on the extremest you see on TV.  I would like to see someone who actually was a neutral member of the Lakota tribe that grew up here to set us all straight and until then to take both sides with a grain of salt.

As far as Thunderheart I can say with authority that that movie was a very good example of Hollywoods view of something they know nothing about and not bothering to do any research.  That movie in know way belongs in any discussion of reservation politics or AIM