| Author |
 Topic  |
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
 Posted - December 22 2004 : 9:35:03 PM
|
D.c., look around the world we live in to day. Man's inhumanity to man, murder, mayhem, suicide bombers killing women and children; virtually hell on earth. In a world of such negativity how can you attach any positive conotation to the suffixes "Phile" and "Probes." The former meaning:likes (too much) and the latter,excessive hate.
Even a hundred years ago these terms represented "excessive" emotions from one camp(Pro-Custer) to the other(Anti-Custer).
Your stance, in this matter, is unrealistic. |
  |
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 23 2004 : 03:24:13 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joseph wiggs
In a world of such negativity how can you attach any positive conotation to the suffixes "Phile" and "Probes." The former meaning:likes (too much) and the latter,excessive hate.
He never said they were positive --- you're either making that up or you just don't understand written prose. They're descriptive terms, and as far as they describe something real, neutral. I won't ask you to define what a Custer-"probe" is.
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 25 2004 : 12:08:10 AM
|
Larsen, as one who has be saturated with the nomenclature of a "purple prose writer" by you and your co-hort, how could I possibly comprehend "written prose" written By D.c.
You of all people should know that. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 1:29:50 PM
|
| Please don't give up on me D.c., I need your guidance! |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 5:17:31 PM
|
| I would think, Warlord, as a supposed Department of Justice employee of unknown success, you'd be rather upset if someone were feigning a past cophood. It's not as bad as those who pretend to have been soldiers, or if soldiers to have been in combat, but pretending to a glorious past on the risks and uniforms of others is pretty low. Hiding behind Lorenzo and children and now a supposed uniform is all of a piece for Wiggs. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 28 2004 : 09:45:25 AM
|
| Again, Warlord, your background - and mine - is of overpowering unimportance however much you like to talk about it and wish to be applauded for it; you contribute little here. Wiggs, a notorious liar, claims he was a cop and a teacher and I've directly asked for verification, since pretending to uniform is often an offense, and he refuses to provide any evidence. Your summations of my positions are wrong and baseless as usual. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 28 2004 : 9:28:39 PM
|
I am what I am, and I write about it on my own website, a lot and cheerfully. There's even a built in search engine, something that would be handy on this site. Here, in any case, we stick to Custer and related matters. You must know this, having visited my site a lot.
Wiggs has already claimed to be both a cop and a teacher. I don't believe him. I don't think people should pretend to such office without it being true. He's publicly proclaimed it, so there's no further 'danger' in proving it, is there, Warlord? Obviously, he isn't worried about calling attention to himself, since like you he does constantly, and isn't afraid of being sought out. Unless, of course, he's lying. That ought to be of great concern to you. This is relevant because of the charges he's made against soldiers of the 7th Cavalry, particularly Benteen.
Given much of your info you supplied about 1876 firearms turned out not to be true, nor based on first hand knowledge, and that's been the extent of your input, you're certainly not a military expert. And I'm not interested in your present or past unless you're the same guy who wrote the skull book. You're not an object of interest, apparently to anyone which is why you scream a lot. When you have information denied others or not known, glad to have it. But thus far, you're utterly unread on Custer and this battle. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 28 2004 : 10:45:16 PM
|
Warlord said:
"You say our backgrounds are of overpowering unimportance. Actually I completely disagree! Thats why I constantly have to correct you on military matters."
For crying out loud, here I just come from lambasting WL on one thread and now feel obligated to agree with him on that point!
Our backgrounds impact our entire perception of the Indian Wars in general and the Custer fight in particular. If someone has a military background, they have a completely different take on the battle from me, an armchair general. We can roll through the enumerations as long as you wish DC but background does impact viewpoint no matter how unbiased someone wishes to be.
Me? I am totally unsympathetic to the Indian's point of view.
Long live Manifest Destiny!
Billy |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2004 : 09:49:14 AM
|
Of course backgrounds affect how you think. Never said otherwise.
So what, though? What's posted here is either considered or not based on content and ability to convince. I certainly don't believe someone's conclusions simply because they're a supposed scientist or an alleged combat vet, and have difficulty watching other adults be so willingly credulous.
Warlord, your intense desire to provoke someone, anyone, into making an ass of himself to the extent you chronically have is both incompetent and more damning to you than any reply.
|
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2004 : 1:59:27 PM
|
I've claimed no education nor experience. It's irrelevant. Only those who have claimed such can be called on to prove it.
You pretty much left the ground by thinking anyone, anywhere, would want to be mistaken for yourself or Wiggs, or that you're the subject of envy. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on December 29 2004 2:02:09 PM |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2004 : 3:05:36 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Let this post show all, DARK CLOUD REFUSES TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION REGARDING HIS EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE. YET HE CONTINUES TO TALK DOWN TO OTHER BOARD MEMBERS AND PRETEND HE IS THE ALL KNOWING HIGHLY EDUCATED AND EXPERIENCED GURU OF THIS MESSAGEBOARD!
You can count me here too, and rave all you like. I've never claimed to have any credentials which gives me anything special about Custer, the Indian wars, or the battle, that no one else has. Just what I've read, or in some cases observed on the fields. That's all that anybody has. If you don't like his opinions you're welcome to marshal your evidence and dispute them. Of course, that might actually require some guts, and putting yourself out on the line and risking the possibility that the other guy might actually have a better case than you......
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2004 : 3:13:33 PM
|
It's funny, though. Diving into the breech and taking part in the debates seems to be a tempest that all except you are willing to undergo. Why the lack of contribution? Why the fear?
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 30 2004 : 02:57:39 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Larsen: WHY ARE YOU AFRAID TO COME OUT OF THE DARK AND POST YOUR EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE! Is it so pathetic you can't talk about limp wrist little boy! Is the little boy afraid of the nasty man who is so bold as to ask for your credentials?
You've never done anything "bold" here Warlord, unless the definition of skulking cowardice has suddenly reversed itself without my knowing.
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 30 2004 : 5:11:56 PM
|
Warlord, you are correct. During this violatile exghange between you and D.c., his fixation upon me was exceedingly apparent. I might also add, bizarre! To harbor so much animosity towards someone you don't know and, have never met, defies believability.
As Warlord trashed, destroyed, and obilerated this man, he can only refrain, "Wiggs", "Wiggs", and more "Wiggs." His little aper is as bad.
Too much time has been wasted attempting to reason with these two. Their inability to act like men makes me wonder just what/who they really are. I have never encountered men who act this way. I am astounded by the unmitigated gall of Larsen/D.c. to accuse anyone of cowardice; you two exemplify it! |
Edited by - joseph wiggs on December 30 2004 5:17:45 PM |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 30 2004 : 7:58:29 PM
|
I have been accused, tried by proxy, and condemned for "demonizing" Benteen. These charges are initiated by a miniscule and, uninformed, minority. Apparently they stem from a past post in which I stated that upon arriving to the environs of Reno's "charge", Benteen observed 12 or 13 dismounted soldiers being charged by warriors. At that point, He ordered a "right oblique" leaving these men to their fate; "slaughtered."
These men were attacked, most, if not all, were butchered, Benteen's decision to "exit" stage left with his fresh, and unscathed battalion deprived the unfortunants of any last chance.
I was immediately assaulted with a seething tirade of "how dare you's" that dumbfounded me. How "dare" I blame Benteen with the death of those men or, words to that effect. I replied, I didn't blame him. His decision was based, I'm sure, on what was best for he and his men. My earlier statement referring to the men being left to be slaughtered was immediatelyregurgitated and "quoted" with the tag, "liar, liar, pants on fire' firmly attached. The two harpies have been screaming that chorus every since. Unable to distinquish between a statement and an accusation, they remain befuddled in a quagmire of ignorance.
Did Benteen commit an act that could be construed as, at the least, questionable? The following is his testimony at the Reno Court of Inquiry:
"When I received my orders from Custer to separate myself from the command, I had NO instructions to unite at any time with Reno or anyone else. There was NO plan at all. My orders were "Valley hunting ad infinitum." The reason I returned was because I thought I would be needed at the ridge. I acted entirely on my own judgement. I was separated from Reno possibly fifteen miles when at the greatest distance."
A Court of Inquiry is not a Court Martial. However, All witnesses (23) during the inquiry were subjected to cross examination under OATH! During this era, you were presented with a bible, placed your right hand upon it and, swore before the "Almighty God." What would you think of a person who did not tell the truth under God? In our present world of super technology and Man's ego, faith in God has been somewhat diminished. Not so during Benteen's day. A man's word was his bond, a scared trust. A valuable commodity that even the poorest cherished.
Taking the above paragraph at face value, Benteen and his men were left out to dry by a commander who could only have been an idiot. To dispatch a significant portion of your fighting men on a "Wild Goose Chase" with no plans while you prepare to meet the entire Sioux Nation defies rationality. I would not propose to explain or justify that decision.
What happens though if we discover that Benteen did not tell the truth, that he lied under oath. That he misled an august panel of truth seekers intentionally? What then?
July 2, 1876:
On board the Far West, Benteen wrote to his wife,"I was ordered with companies D, H, and K, to go to the left for the purpose of hunting for the valley of the river-Indian camp, or anything I could find.
(Direct order advising him to locate specific objectives.)
April 28, 1915:
Lt. Gibson (under Benteen's command) wrote,
Col. Benteen was not guilty of either treachery or disobedience of orders. His orders were to take his battalion to the left and if he found any Indians trying to escape up the valley of the Little Big Horn, to intercept them and drive them back. Should he find nothing he was to pick up the trail again and follow it on."
( confirmation of the order to achieve specific objectives and to return to the trail-the command- if nothing found.)
July 24, 1876:
Benteen's official report,
Benteen said that Custer's INSTRUCTIONS were that, as soon as he became convinced that "there was nothing to be seen of Indians, valleys, etc., in the direction I was going, to return with the battalion" to the trail the command was following.
Benteen chose to misinform, mislead, palter, and/or forget to tell the truth on his own volition. The facts are there for the reader who is not a "Custerphobe." To slay the messenger serves no purpose, never has, and never will.
P.S. Every scholar in this field I have come across state that Benteen was never more that 7 to 8 miles away from Custer. Why did he double the distance? |
Edited by - joseph wiggs on December 30 2004 8:08:17 PM |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 30 2004 : 8:50:23 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joseph wiggs
Warlord, you are correct. During this violatile exghange between you and D.c., his fixation upon me was exceedingly apparent. I might also add, bizarre! To harbor so much animosity towards someone you don't know and, have never met, defies believability.
I don't know of anyone who bears you any animosity. It's more puzzlement as to why you'd post things such as Sitting Bull's "dream", or the flip-flops on Benteen which started it all. I don't understand it.
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 30 2004 : 9:08:10 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joseph wiggs
P.S. Every scholar in this field I have come across state that Benteen was never more that 7 to 8 miles away from Custer. Why did he double the distance?
We don't know that he did. It's only an estimate, and the route of the scout is uncertain. People misestimate, and on the flip-side, it's also possible that scholars' reconstructions of where Benteen went are inaccurate. This isn't an exact science.
I'm not quite certain which part of Benteen's testimony at the Court you're chastizing him for. When he says that he had "no instructions to unite at any time with Reno or anyone else" at the time given his orders, that seems to be accurate. When he says there "was no plan at all," it seems fair to say that he didn't know of any. His orders from Custer were fairly limited, and as later events showed, so hastily given as to be incomplete (Custer needed to send two additional messengers with additions).
As for "valley hunting ad infinitum," that seems to have been an exaggeration, but I'm not sure it's a lie so much as hyperbole. His report of 7/4 says that his orders were to go on until "in my judgment there was nothing to be seen of Indians, Valleys, &c., in the direction I was going," which theoretically could mean to infinity, although that obviously was not Custer's intent. In any case, I'm not sure what effect, positive or negative, it has on the battle. Even Gibson, who you quote, says that Benteen followed his orders. Where else can you go?
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 30 2004 : 11:15:28 PM
|
It probably does to you, Warlord, but then you're unread on the subject.
If you wish to talk about me, I have a website: www.darkendeavors.com, and it has a forum. All you have to do is post inquiries about me there. Anybody who is actually interested can read the exchange there, and the others who couldn't care less - which means about everyone - can continue here talking about Custer and related issues.
Meanwhile, those puzzled by Wiggs' inability to prove he was an actual police officer and a teacher, and where he gets off claiming such, can continue to read here, awaiting his continued avoidance. Those who read Markland's post that Sklenar's book To Hell With Honor, a fourth source, supports my position on Custer's financial distress - which Warlord claims nobody knows about because it isn't true - may inquire of Warlord when he'll admit he isn't read on the subject in general, wrong on this issue in particular, and what motivates him to post his private correspondence with Wiggs unasked by those likely to read it. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 30 2004 : 11:41:19 PM
|
DC, et. al., let us leave Wiggs' your opinion of Wiggs' qualifications for a moment and simply remember that he has the defining qualification: He is interested in the minutiae of Custer's movements before and during the battle of the Little Big Horn! While you two are poles apart in your opinions, please give him the respect of someone who at least reads about this period in American history. There are not many of us and it ill-behooves us (got that term from Sherlock Holmes) to kick co-enthusiasts out of the "crib". Yes, criticize him, or anyone, on stretching fact...because without fact, in all the opinions of the Custer battle, we are lost, but whether he is a lawyer, chief, or dishwasher; his opinions are welcome.
Tired of the B.S. from so many smart folks,
Billy |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 31 2004 : 12:06:38 AM
|
| Wiggs is perfectly qualified to express his opinion here; never suggested otherwise. If he pretends to be a police officer or a teacher he has to be responsible for it, and it's a separate issue from every point of view. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 31 2004 : 12:20:06 AM
|
DC wrote:
"If he pretends to be a police officer or a teacher he has to be responsible for it, and it's a separate issue from every point of view."
Exactly and should be handled, unless someone is claiming their expertise gives them divine understanding, on an off-channel communication.
Speaking of which, I am enjoying Skelnar immensely!
Billy |
|
|
|
bhist
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - December 31 2004 : 10:55:22 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by BJMarkland
Tired of the B.S. from so many smart folks,
Billy
Hear, hear!! You've made the most intelligent observation seen in this forum in months, Billy. "Tired of the B.S. from so many smart folks."
I'm sick and tired of hearing Wiggs called a liar or demanding his credentials. D.C. and Larsen have made their points countless times and I don’t see any advantage to them continuing it.
D.C. and Larsen -- you two have so much to contribute to this forum. Honestly, I believe the two of you are the most knowledgeable on this board, but all respect for you could be lost if your overblown complaints continue. I ask that you please close this long-winded argument out.
I know no one will care with what I say, but one of my New Year’s resolutions (which I never make) is to stop visiting and contributing to this board if I hear more about Wiggs lying. I’m a very busy person, and this board can take too much time to read through the bullcrap. Know what I mean?
Wiggs -- you have to stop giving support to Warlord. Just because he must have come to your aid doesn't make him right. He's a monster and I'm very disappointed in you that you can even acknowledge Warlord in such a positive light. I hope you don't do it again.
So, if everyone followed Billy's suggestion and Warlord lost the ability to type, then we'd all be back to where we should be -- discussing the Little Bighorn.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
|
Warmest Regards,
Bob
www.vonsworks.com
www.friendslittlebighorn.com
www.friendsnezpercebattlefields.org |
Edited by - bhist on December 31 2004 10:56:48 AM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 31 2004 : 11:00:09 AM
|
That, of course, was Wiggs' choice. By claiming such here, though, and not in private correspondence as evidence for his insight and view, he therefore needs to verify it here or admit it as a lie. I find it very strange so few are angered by someone pretending to have been a cop; that's only a minor compass heading from pretending to have been a soldier. Or, if a soldier, to pretend to have been in combat.
Sklenar is a Custerphile of the first water, and refers to him as 'Autie.' This is like reading a biography of Patton where he's referred to, in dead seriousness, as Georgie-Poo. An affected first name relationship with the long dead is not a clue to objectivity or search for the truth. And, of course, this from the introduction: page xii “…the great man with a fatal flaw that leads to his undoing.” A Greek cliche that doesn't bear much weight or scrutiny for anyone to whom it's applied, especially a Custer to whom few have applied the term "great." In fact, who?
The unwary reader would not know about Jesse Lee's background, or Whitaker's. Or Mrs. Belknap's contacts with the Custers, as Sklenar seems unaware or unwilling to share evidence from Reno's CW record. But then, by page 3, Sklenar seems unaware that Mexico and Canada are part of North America.
On page 11 he becomes concerned over Custer's "mistakes" like desertion and murder because he loved Libbie so (even during those Christmas holidays when she was at the frontier fort and he was in Michigan) although she was charmed by Weir and Custer had reason to fear them together, Sklenar suggests. Mary Adams, we guess, was worried enough about her mistress she had someone write a letter to Custer warning him, which prompted his desertion. Such love. Sklenar also says Weir was so upset after Custer got through with him and apologized on his knees, that he lost his hair and wore a wig that summer. Per Barnitz.
Sklenar misreads the autopsy of Reno where noted symtoms could be syphilis or other things. Sklenar says definitely syphilis without basis.
On page 71 and 2, he admits but does not explain that the 7th was in two wings answering to Terry, not Custer. C annoyed that the band had to stay and give its horses to actual soldiers. Think about that. Also, he was annoyed his wife and sister hadn't been allowed to travel on the steamboat further up, and apparently thought it the army's duty to escort women pointlessly and selfishly through Indian territory.
On page 91, along with an incoherent sentence he claims the Springfield had a habit of jamming, although Crook's men didn't think so, but then Crook's men didn't notice all those Winchesters that Custer supposedly faced as well.
Where Varnum sees two lodges, Sklenar says Custer "must have seen" many more.
Sklenar says Wa****a definitely won by the taking of prisoners, although that's at loggerheads with the expressed fear of attack and the feint.
He also feels Girard mistook running Sioux with tentpoles as a static village. P. 135. He's a paid "scout" and cannot tell a moving from a static village.
On page 142 he tries to make orders involving a village 3 miles ahead apply to lodge a few hundred yards ahead.
On page 161 says with surety Custer planned to show himself on bluff to "confuse" Indians. Huh?
Throughout Fatal Separation Chapter just declares things mistakes that don't fit his theory.
As for Benteen and his mileage, he claimed - starting with the letter to his wife after the battle and in his report, I think - that the distance from when he split off from Custer to begin his scout to where he found Custer's body was about 15 miles, which it is. He does not, as I recall, say that it was fifteen miles from separation to rejoining Custer's trail. I don't see the exaggeration. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on December 31 2004 11:22:26 AM |
|
|
|
bhist
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - December 31 2004 : 11:48:27 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Sklenar is a Custerphile of the first water, and refers to him as 'Autie.' This is like reading a biography of Patton where he's referred to, in dead seriousness, as Georgie-Poo. An affected first name relationship with the long dead is not a clue to objectivity or search for the truth. And, of course, this from the introduction: page xii “…the great man with a fatal flaw that leads to his undoing.” A Greek cliche that doesn't bear much weight or scrutiny for anyone to whom it's applied, especially a Custer to whom few have applied the term "great." In fact, who?
I also don't understand the infatuation with Sklenar. I'm still amazed that U.O. Press even published it. The best it should have qualified for was self-published, like all the other Custer books written by wannabe historians.
I know many people that buy anything about Custer. They don't care if it's good or bad. That can be the only reason why this book is bought. But, what disturbs me is Custer organizations putting Sklenar on stage as if he's some God.
|
Warmest Regards,
Bob
www.vonsworks.com
www.friendslittlebighorn.com
www.friendsnezpercebattlefields.org |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Benteen's order
Topic Locked
