| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| bhist |
Posted - November 03 2003 : 6:27:52 PM
As promised folks I finally have permission to publish the photo of Weir Point taken in 1901 by Lee Moorhouse. I also have a photo taken by Friends' member, Jim Brust in 1995. To view the before and after photos visit the Friends of the Little Bighorn Battlefield at http://www.friendslittlebighorn.com/Weir_point.htm |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - January 04 2005 : 2:51:42 PM
Sure, he gets it. Everyone gets it. And, you're remarkably unread on actual government conspiracies to rely on tabloids and old televsion show fodder as examples. |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - January 04 2005 : 01:50:41 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Your phony disciple larsen was the one so incredulousy that the gov. could lie per his posting above!
I wasn't incredulous that the government could lie. I'm just asking for evidence of it. I don't think that was a hard thing to grasp for someone with basic reading skills.
R. Larsen |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - January 04 2005 : 01:47:29 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Larsen: Actually kid, I urinate more knowledge down the toilet after lunch than you are ever likely to get in your lifetime. You are the one who uses the word conspiracy not me. I merely observe how gov. works.
Then I wonder why the word "conspiracy" so upsets you. It's you who accuses everyone --- white, Indian, powerful, powerless --- without evidence, of lying to suppress the truth for their own self-serving ends. According to you, it was official government policy. Show evidence of this.
R. Larsen |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - January 03 2005 : 11:49:20 PM
Ah. We can add the Enquirer to Warlord's source reading material, along with teenage gamesite intro pages and Soldier of Fortune. Yeah, the Glomar Explorer was a real mystery. I think Leonard Nimoy broke that wide open on In Search of... in the 70's. Nobody, liberal or conservative, has ever said the government - escpecially our government - is all honesty. Nobody above the age of six could say that without laughing. Apparently it came as a shock to you, though. |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - January 03 2005 : 01:49:13 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Well kid: I am the one who worked thirty years for gov. not you. So I guess I know one hell of a lot more about it then some snot nosed kid pretending to be a law school student!!! We are not talking conspiracy here, just how it work's!
Actually, I don't think you know anything about the inner workings of 1870s American government. Your posts certainly show no acquaintance with it. If you have evidence that Grant, Sheridan, or whomever really did conspire to suppress Indian casualty figures, for whatever reason, show it.
Same goes for the pile of Indian corpses you fantasize.
R. Larsen |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - January 03 2005 : 12:53:01 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
No it isn't common sense. It's a rather strained grab at conspiracy. This is government we're talking about. Show the paperwork.
So far the only basis I've seen for rejecting what all say is that you simply don't want to believe it. You don't have any actual evidence to support your own inflated figures. That's fine as far as it goes, except for the rather nagging fact that it doesn't go anywhere.
What qualifies me to give an opinion on this (and I'd hope it's shared by all here) is the ability to read and the curiosity to seek out what's pertinent to the question. Anybody who lacks those two things probably won't do too well.
R. Larsen |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 31 2004 : 11:40:33 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
larsen: The army had been severely reduced from civil war numbers. They were not interested in "salvaging pride", they were interested in a bigger budget and recruitment. Claiming any kind of victory, particularly a large one would have been detrimental to their purposes.
You don't have any secret cables, telegrams, notes, etc. where they discuss this, do you?
quote:
Yes, many indians were interviewed most of them lying their heads off so badly no one believes them.
Some of them may have been lying for all anyone knows, but if we're to believe the fatality figures you've produced, from neither Indian nor military sources, all were. You may not believe it, but that's a far, far cry from "no one".
quote:
Actually, if you had the skills law school teaches you would be arguing both sides of the matter in an attempt to determine what sounds the most valid. But we both know you don't have those skills, don't we, larsen!!!
What's most valid is what's most plausible, and there's quite a large body of evidence for double digit Indian fatality figures, and none at all for the 1,000+ you claim for. Even if what you allege is true, that the Indians and military both conspired to put out misleadingly low death numbers, it still wouldn't provide any justification for a number like 1,320.
R. Larsen |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 30 2004 : 9:49:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
This is not an answer to you Bobbie, but I am interested in this facet of LBH. Actually I think the indian deaths might be a good deal higher than that. There is no doubt the army was underestimating indian deaths for their reasons, the indians were underestimating for their reasons and the indian agents underestimating warriors gone from the reservation. We after all are talking about the point in history where the plains indians were broken. Due to most parties involved not giving accurate numbers estimation has to be used. I will be talking about this more in the future as it has been badly handled on this board.
Well, I don't see what reasons the army would have to underestimate the Indian dead. The slaughter of 200 soldiers was an embarassment, and if they could have salvaged some pride from it by depicting Custer as having ripped the Indians through the meat grinder, one would think they would have done it. As for the Indians, though there's some variation among their totals (there's a few who suggest the number may have gone up to 60, and one outlier who places the total at a suspiciously specific 136) had the number really been as high as you claim it to be, at least somebody would have presumably spilled the beans. Many, many Indians were interviewed, by different people, at different times, and this extreme casualty figure comes from nowhere. The fact that probably can't be avoided is that Custer was defeated, and whipped rather badly, on atrocious ground by numbers that were overpowering.
R. Larsen |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 30 2004 : 9:15:38 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Bobbie: you sound like a little girl stood up by her prom date.
More like a person wondering how you came up with 1,320 Indian deaths. Little Knife, Crow King, Low Dog, Pretty White Buffalo, Horn Chips, Fluing Hawk, Lone Bear, Charlie Corn, He Dog, White Bull, Big Head Woman, Wooden Leg, and One Bull must have all been really blind, to miss carnage like that.
R. Larsen
|
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 30 2004 : 03:06:21 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Larsen: Your pathetic diatribe about being unable to furnish any background on yourself brands you as a major liar! 470 posts of screaming for citations and no significant contributions shows how lacking you are in credibility! The only fairytales of casualties at LBH are the fantasies you and others believe about a massacre of 200 some well armed soliers who could only kill thirty indians! FOOL!
I accept no criticism from a little kid (and thats what you are) pretending to be a law school student. You don't have the brains for it!!!
"Homoerotic" is that the kind of guy you are?
Don't try to talk about debate because you never contributed anything worthwhile in 470 posts.
You are just a kid trying to be a man! Once again I ask you to supply substantiation of any kind of higher education or experience!!! You don't have it boy! And thats not all you don't have!
Asking you to judge what's "worthwhile" is like asking cabbage to tell you what color it is.
Sources for the death figures of 1,320? Zippo. Zero. Zilch. As we expected from the caps-hound Warlord. Well done. Shows real initiative, absolutely without peer. Most other people would have been lazy and at least provided some evidence, but you've got them beat with your style of crazy-assertion-followed-by-panicked-screaming-and-testicle-fantasizing.
30 dead Indians? Little Knife, Crow King, Low Dog, Pretty White Buffalo, Horn Chips, Fluing Hawk, Lone Bear, Charlie Corn, He Dog, White Bull, Big Head Woman, Wooden Leg, One Bull. Richard Hardorff has been nice enough to print a chart of all their numbers on pg 154 of "Hokahey". Their full interviews are scattered here and there.
I'm not sure I accept the figure of 30 that Hardorff finds pretty conclusive; the real number might have been a bit higher, though in view of all the evidence I don't see how it could have been by much. Two dead ponies are all that Benteen saw on the field.... two dead Indian ponies. With 70 dead cavalry horses spread around. Quite remarkable considering the pogrom that you'd have us believe took place among the Indians.
I'm afraid you don't have a choice as to who you'll accept criticism from. You'll either be criticized or you won't. If you're as old as you claim you should have learned that by now. Your stamping that you "won't accept" criticism is rather pathetic, since to my knowledge you haven't yet done anything on this board not deserving of criticism. If you have it got buried among your PMS-ish ravings at Bhist and Rich and whomever else has intimidated you. The bottom line is that you're too afraid to debate, which is why I know you won't reply at all with any evidence refuting what I've just said about the Indian fatalities. You'll just scream like a lunatic and hope no one notices that you know nothing.
R. Larsen
|
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 29 2004 : 8:00:26 PM
I don't disagree. I had in mind the tribes of roving villages, chasing the buffalo herd, wintering out in teepees, living off what nature gave them, and dying if it didn't. Those people, and that way of life, are as dead as the horse cavalry.
R. Larsen |
| Heavyrunner |
Posted - December 29 2004 : 7:24:43 PM
Larson,
While not getting involved in the "discussion" here, I am going to disagree with your opinion that tribes have disappeared into alcoholism and government control.
Sadly, it's taken casinos to remind the country, but tribes have not only persevered, but generally grown in numbers and many are finding considerable prosperity. Most, at the same time, have long since shed BIA programs and influence and moved on to self-governance. Perhaps this is a topic for another thread or another day, but I felt something should be written.
|
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 29 2004 : 2:31:38 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Larsen: Once again I call on you to provide documentation as to your supposed education! Comon alleged law student, lets see it!!!
Sorry Warlord, you're just going to have to content yourself with what I said, to believe or not. I never came here to trade stories about my offline life, and I won't invite into it a psychopath to harass those I know. If not contented you'll just have to stew, beg, and degrade yourself further with exclamation-pointed wailing, which shall have amusement value, if none other. I'm skeptical, as a rule, of all claims of background (jaundiced by early internet experience) and don't need to hear it from you, nor do I think that anybody but you really cared about me. It's usually used as a cheap way to earn respect, by those who can't contribute anything otherwise (such as yourself) who somehow want others to think that their alleged military experience, in a modern world with telephones, tanks, and plastic tutus, contributes any insight at all into a different century, an extinct military branch, and an enemy that vanished into alcoholism and government control decades ago. The result we're bequeathed are fairy tales such as your 1,320 Indian dead suffocating the grass on Custer's battlefield.
Everybody here (except maybe for Wiggs, and to be fair to him I don't know what he thinks) regards you as a fool, an opinion carved into stone by the mental wasteland of your 200-some postings. You haven't contributed anything on-topic (we won't count Custer video games), and not much of anything off-topic either, unless there's a constituency other than yourself that's really big on homoerotic obsessions with male genitalia, though I think I speak for all when I say that none of us needed to know that your imagination dwelt so often on mine or Hitler's. I hope you're a big man on those gamesites your frequent, because here your fear of debate and pervasive cowardice only invite scorn and ridicule.
R. Larsen |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 29 2004 : 10:10:25 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
I'd like one (1) example of a questionable quote from me. One.
You mean you haven't been using the back of a video game box for documentation?
R. Larsen |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 29 2004 : 10:07:24 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
larson: Once again you parade your immaturity and lack of education. What a laugh someone from Kansas has to tell you (a supposed California law school student) about the California educational system! Actually, whatever goes on in CA. High Schools, California is ranked 15 in number of college graduates compared with Miss. 45th position. Not that I personally think that Miss. education system is all that bad. You, Sir are an ignorant kid! You also call up questionable quotes just like DC!
Only 15 in the number of college graduates? If what you report is accurate (and I feel free to doubt) then that is pretty damning, since California is by far the largest state in the union. Not that you'd notice, since I don't think you really know what you post. You seem to more enjoy sharing your personal psychoses with everyone than accurate historical information, and though amusing at first, chronic mental instability never turns out funny.
R. Larsen |
| bhist |
Posted - December 29 2004 : 01:18:41 AM
quote:
Originally posted by BJMarkland
WL, are you reverting back to Mr. Hyde?
Happy New Year bucky!
Billy
He is, Billy. I expect an explosion from WL any moment. |
| BJMarkland |
Posted - December 28 2004 : 10:28:17 PM
"larson: Once again you parade your immaturity and lack of education. What a laugh someone from Kansas has to tell you (a supposed California law school student) about the California educational system! Actually, whatever goes on in CA. High School..."
WL, to get on my baddest side, keep on implying that I am from Kansas! I live in Kansas, pay taxes (unwillingly) in that state, but I am FROM North Carolina and if you wish to make something of it, please IM me so I can set you straight!
Now, if the two of you were not so busy one-upping the other, you would have done the same as I did, i.e., go to www.google.com and typed, in the "search field", the words (including quotation marks) & symbol, "California+Education". You would have found the same as I did. It wasn't bloody rocket science.
Now as far as veracity is concerned, quite honestly I will back the Larsen horse. He may be a pain in the ass because he demands sources for the "out of left field" comments received but he is consistent in requesting it of everyone, not just you or Wiggs.
Since your immediate come-back to Larsen or DC is that they are uneducated, I wish you to know that I have only a high school education. That must make me, in your opinion, uneducated as hell...hmmm, perhaps it just makes me less smooth in calling a "focker" a "focker". Prove to me, that if you want to learn, having a bunch of letters after your name makes you smarter.
WL, are you reverting back to Mr. Hyde?
Happy New Year bucky!
Billy |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - December 28 2004 : 9:54:33 PM
I'd like one (1) example of a questionable quote from me. One.
|
| BJMarkland |
Posted - December 28 2004 : 06:34:38 AM
"That something like this is allowed --- no, apparently needed --- does much to explain to anyone why California ranks somewhere near Mississippi on the nation's educational rankings. "
Not necessarily. Here in Kansas, the teacher must have lesson plans for the week already made up, thus, if absent, the substitute can follow the lesson plan. Most school districts in the country follow something like that requirement. Now, having said that, it is a given that in most advanced high school courses, the substitute will find themselves mainly guiding a review of past lessons, giving homework/reading assignments and preventing the kids from running wild. That is with the assumption that the substitute is not a specialist teacher in the subject matter being taught. I think most of us can remember when we had substitute teachers in high school.
Best of wishes for a Happy New Year,
Billy |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 28 2004 : 04:30:35 AM
quote:
Originally posted by BJMarkland
The only one I see meeting WL's description is for a "Emergency 30 Day Substitute Teaching Permit" which has for its credential requirmentes:
1) Hold a baccalaureate or higher degree from a regionally- accredited college or university.
2) Pass the California Basic Educational Skills Test (CBEST).
That something like this is allowed --- no, apparently needed --- does much to explain to anyone why California ranks somewhere near Mississippi on the nation's educational rankings. Thanks for locating this.
R. Larsen |
| BJMarkland |
Posted - December 28 2004 : 04:19:25 AM
Rather than listen to the arguing any longer, I did some digging. The State of California has a nice web site featuring all kinds of interesting links to their educational requirments for teachers of various types. The only one I see meeting WL's description is for a "Emergency 30 Day Substitute Teaching Permit" which has for its credential requirmentes:
1) Hold a baccalaureate or higher degree from a regionally- accredited college or university.
2) Pass the California Basic Educational Skills Test (CBEST).
Holders of single-subject teaching degrees or multiple-subject teaching degrees have a much higher standard, i.e., many hours of instruction in their specialist fields in addition to the precondition coursework.
Vocational Arts substitute teachers must have a high school diploma or GED and 5 years work experience in the chosen field. Educational experience can be substituted for some part of the work experience. The permit for Vocational Arts substitute teachers is issued for one year and for subsequent reissue, the applicant must have fulfilled 30 clock hours of professional growth (don't ask me what that is!) since the reissue date of thelast reissue.
The web site can be found at:
http://www.ca.gov/state/portal/myca_homepage.jsp
Click on the Education link at the top of the left-side sidebar.
Another site from the main page where I picked up the information:
http://www.ctc.ca.gov/credentialinfo/credinfo.html
Now can we get back to the Custer worship portion of the program?
Respectfully,
Billy |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 28 2004 : 03:22:53 AM
quote:
Originally posted by bhist
[brI think checking Henry cartridges found at LBH with any found at Fetterman would be an outstanding idea.
J.W. Vaughn metal detectored the area where Wheatley and Fisher fought and didn't find any; in fact, he barely found anything: just three smashed bullets and a button. I don't know what luck later searchers have had. I think there were some archaeological digs at the Fetterman battlefield not too long ago, but I don't know any details.
R. Larsen |
| Anonymous Poster8169 |
Posted - December 28 2004 : 03:19:40 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
That someone in California only needed to have a BA and take a test in order to qualify to teach high school was news to me, and I don't feel any shame saying it. If it's common knowledge (and I don't think it is) then obviously I was kept out of the loop. I thought you needed to take about 20 units of teaching instruction in order to earn a credential, about 300 hours of total class-time, which has my respect. At the very least, investing that amount of time shows real dedication on the part of the person wishing to teach. Taking a mere test to get it reeks of dilettantism. I see you shouting and raving in various exclamation points, but do you have actual proof that a BA and a test is all you need to stick your feet in through the doors of California high schools? If this is real I think it's something that ought to be changed. Inflicting subpar teachers on this country's youth is, truly, a form of self-immolation.
I don't find your claims to military intelligence, or Wiggs's to policework or high school instruction, credible at all. If you don't want to believe me either, that's fine. I don't expect anyone to or care. I've known cops and soldiers, and none of them have ever lied to me, or without provocation slandered and smeared others (like you did to Bhist and Rich). I think you're a fake, a poseur, and a coward, a weakling whose one small thrill in life is screaming at people from behind the safety of a computer screen. It doesn't look like you know much of anything about the battle of the Little Bighorn, or Custer, or the Plains Indians, or anything pertinent. In this Wiggs has an advantage on you, since at times he has contributed accurate and useful information. It's just too bad he hasn't done it more consistently.
R. Larsen |
| bhist |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 4:05:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by BJMarkland
Prolar, thanks. Yes, there were two known Henrys on the battlefield, those of Wheatley and Fischer.
This is a very interesting question. And, it made me wonder about what happened to Wheatley and Fischer's Henrys during and after the battle. If I were an Indian warrior, who witnessed the power from these guns at the Fetterman Battle, I'd want one.
So, once those two white men are dead, a warrior or warriors pick up those guns for themselves. 10 years later, their sons have inherited those powerful weapons and use them against the bluecoats along the Greasy Grass.
I think checking Henry cartridges found at LBH with any found at Fetterman would be an outstanding idea.
Merry Christmas...
|
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 1:24:22 PM
Does anyone, besides me, wonder why D.c., and Larsen are so fascinated with me? I have never had so much attention devoted to me in all my life. Thanks fellas! |
|
|
