| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - November 19 2009 : 08:47:59 AM
|
The woman who posted as a man had also posted under many other ID's, and I routinely objected. This isn't a social site, nor one for people to try and construct an acceptable public persona on slandered reputations of the dead because these posters weren't gifted with one, like Wiggs. When she died, a number of ID's failed to reappear on another forum.
What this does - not always, but not unoften either - is to deceive and shill. There are those, like Wiggs, who are unable to construct anything original and steal from other sites to post others' opinions as their own. On this message board you can easily see where he lied, didn't understand what he'd posted (because he got it elsewhere), or understand what others had posted.
He also plagiarized, unsurprisingly, and not content with that, made up quotes. These examples of his have been listed often, most amusingly here under a long thread to do with Benteen. For these alone, his claims of being a peace officer are to be seriously doubted, because even the most corrupt and stupid police forces have standards.
His inability to know law, basic police procedure, or understand rather obvious English expression bolsters that view. You have to read him from the beginning to see his struggles with the truth and not pretend, as he does chronically, that he can establish a new baseline (and often new User ID)every few months, and the past can be forgotten. He admits on a board he's pretending to be a woman under one (or more) name(s) and tries to deny it elsewhere.
His continued inability of late, in kindest light, to see that Benteen had an opinion during the battle and another after, clearly expressed by predicate choices in his testimony and letters, speaks to one of Wiggs' many, many problems.
Several people, when the ID 'Boston' appeared on the official LBHA board, thought Boston was Wiggs, because 'Boston' was a persona seemingly constructed to address Wiggs' past remarked upon deficiencies, I guess. This was during the time they were trying to get me to post there so I could be edited, but they might be right about that, anyway.
So what? He slanders 7th officers for his own entertainment and elevation of self, a tradition in Custerland for people who'd never have the wherewithal to do that to their face. I never served and I'm pretty sure I'm a coward, and I have no standing to denigrate combat vets, past or present. What annoys me greatly is that so very few in Custerland do, either, yet they toss around 'coward' as if they were qualified to do so. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
  |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 19 2009 : 08:52:23 AM
|
Originally posted by Benteen
Night and day on this issue as well, I fear Ranger. Not to start anything here either. But I can't see it that way, because it really didn't happen that way. It did happen that way This of course has been the story written for so long, that it has become the 2nd verse to a long song for so long, that it has virtually became an Anthem unto itself.
I’ll go with what Benteen said, and broaden it to include him and Reno as well, “I think there might have been a great many commands given, but I think very few were obeyed.” Terry's
As for outstanding performances, the opportunities were there, and if they had obeyed the commands given them and “acted within acceptable ranges for officers“, there indeed would have been outstanding performances; so I cannot agree that they “acted within acceptable ranges for officers. The Army agreed with me and they are the only ones that matter when it comes to who stays in the Army or who goes
One simply must trust in your commanding officer at a time like this,Wrong one must obey the order until substantial changes occur. Trust has nothing to do with it. Did they need to trust Terry and Custer that the Indians would run? Or could they see with their own eyes the Indians were coming to battle. Custer acted as a battalion commander rather than directing all battalions from a HQ position. It was his style but his battalion got direct commands and the others were left to their own decision making. As things developed Custer was not there to tell them how he would do it. Reno chose retrograde which is an acceptable choice.
I think anyone in the military service would tell you this.I was in the military service,USMC, with a tour in Viet Nam, my father in WWII, my grandfather in the 5th Cavalry, my son in the Marine Corps, one father-in-law was a Marine Corps Major and the other a Navy Submarine Commander. Battalion commanders can make choices based upon observations not trust.
If there is ’no confidence’ or any hesitation in his abilities, then it would be and was, in this case a disaster in the making. Both Reno and Benteen expressed this ’no confidence’ in Custer at the Court, and they harbored the same at the battlefield, and it did influence how they performed that day.
Here is someone else's quote
quote:
Lieutenant Godfrey had told Custer there was more gunfire downstream, and Major Elliot was killed perhaps two miles from where Moxtaveto ("Black Kettle") was. Custer and his men were on horseback. Was that too far to travel in snow on horseback, knowing the "enemies" were downstream and having heard a report of gunfire in that direction? How long would it have taken to ride that distance in those conditions? Twenty minutes? Less than forty?
A man commanding the military deserts his comrade troops and their need for safety in order to save himself and his public image for continuing a war. Imagine that.
I am sure Elliot stuck in their minds when it came to confidence. It happened. Each carried out the initial orders. Reno charged and brought the Indians to battle as opposed to them fleeing. Benteen completed his recon in force. What order were sent to Reno after he encountered hundreds of Indians willing to fight. The large numbers of Indians willing to fight is sufficient to allow Reno to make his own choices. If it had only been a few making a dust screen then he should have pushed on. Instead they came to meet him in force. This was not anticipated in Custer's orders.
As for you assertion that there were too many Indians willing to fight, it didn’t phase Custer one bit,How'd that work for him? He knew before he ever left the bluffs, that they were putting up a fight against Reno, and he knew that they would put up a fight against him too. It wasn’t a misjudgment about what the Indians would or would not do; it was, sadly so, what his own men would or would not do, and DID NOT DO. [red]Most Army officers that I have talked with believe that 5 companies should have been able to defend themselves. So does your comments apply to Custer's personally lead battalion?
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 19 2009 : 10:06:17 AM
|
Ranger, as I said, it was my opinion, and I wasn't stating it to start something. You had your say, I had mine. Let's leave it at that.
DC,
I think, and notice this is an opinion, as yours is, that the charge of cowardice wasn’t just applied by us in modern times. There were those back shortly after the conflict that did charge various men and officers with that title. So Joe is not the exception to the rule on that score. And you as well as I, or for that matter anyone else, could go on to recount those who did in years past. Who had the “authority” then; if such authority should be granted as a right of free speech, thought and expression of same? How can one then call this slander when it still to this day is unknown? How is the discovery to be made if it isn’t called into question today, as it was back then? Sure, there are those, like yourself, who would like the debate to end with the COI decision; but that decision only exonerated one man, and even then it did not address in full Reno’s deficiencies that existed prior to that battle, namely the scouting mission that he miserably failed on, which led to the direct cause of the disaster that befell Custer and his troopers thereafter. As for the “elevation of self” & “his own entertainment” charge” I personally don’t see it. He isn’t here 24/7, which would be a dead give-a-way to such charges. But he is not. And I see of his efforts more in the interest of the website than of himself. He is a contributing member, are you? Such selfless acts, I think speaks for itself. And no matter what else you see in his efforts, his perhaps was and still is, the only one with enough honesty and integrity to keep this website sustainable, readable, and bring old and new members to this forum. Amid all that he has had to endure, he has stayed the course, because of his beliefs, and primarily because of the belief that this forum was good enough if not better than any other out there. And you know something, he’s right about that. It is.
|
Edited by - Benteen on November 19 2009 10:07:33 AM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 19 2009 : 9:27:23 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
The woman who posted as a man had also posted under many other ID's, and I routinely objected. This isn't a social site, nor one for people to try and construct an acceptable public persona on slandered reputations of the dead because these posters weren't gifted with one, like Wiggs. When she died, a number of ID's failed to reappear on another forum.
quote:
Welcome back dc. I've truly missed you. I was afraid that you had ceased to exist, that is, you seemed to have deemed our site beneath your dignity as evident by your unsubstantiated and crude remarks regarding az's ability to trash us. We, obviously, don't possess your wit, knowledge and esteem but, still we, nevertheless, carry on.
.
What this does - not always, but not often either - is to deceive and shill. There are those, like Wiggs, who are unable to construct anything original and steal from other sites to post others' opinions as their own. On this message board you can easily see where he lied, didn't understand what he'd posted (because he got it elsewhere), or understand what others had posted.
quote:
It is important that you specify my failings for the benefit of this forum. After all, your infinite wisdom and psychiatric revelations will protect these forum members from an despicable cad such as I. however, wouldn't have been a nice gesture if you would have assumed that these adults already possess the maturity to arrive at their own personal conclusions without your unsolicited assistance
?
He also plagiarized, unsurprisingly, and not content with that, made up quotes. These examples of his have been listed often, most amusingly here under a long thread to do with Benteen. For these alone, his claims of being a peace officer are to be seriously doubted, because even the most corrupt and stupid police forces have standards.
quote:
Why should anyone believe me dc when they have you to lead them to the Nirvana. You, whom spews venom and senseless verbiage that has nothing to do with the Battle like an insidious boiling pot of manure that spills out and over everyone until nothing but the stink of ignorance permeates the air. What I am or am Not is not the issue, that you think that you possess a shred of credibility on this forum is astonishing
!
His inability to know law, basic police procedure, or understand rather obvious English expression bolsters that view. You have to read him from the beginning to see his struggles with the truth and not pretend, as he does chronically, that he can establish a new baseline (and often new User ID)every few months, and the past can be forgotten. He admits on a board he's pretending to be a woman under one (or more) name(s) and tries to deny it elsewhere.
quote:
He who casts the first stone is like the wolf in sheep's clothing, intent upon the sole ambition to destroy, disrupt, and undermine the civility of a group, he falls upon the prey in a disguise of monstrous evil until grabs and rends the hapless victim in a frenzy of barbaric lust; drinking the blood of the weak.
His continued inability of late, in kindest light, to see that Benteen had an opinion during the battle and another after, clearly expressed by predicate choices in his testimony and letters, speaks to one of Wiggs' many, many problems.
quote:
Benteen is an admirable orator who needs no one to prompt him up like a scarecrow in the middle of a corn field. Anyone who has read his posts with the mind and attitude of a mature adult would know this which explains your inabilty to discern this obvious fact
.
Several people, when the ID 'Boston' appeared on the official LBHA board, thought Boston was Wiggs, because 'Boston' was a persona seemingly constructed to address Wiggs' past remarked upon deficiencies, I guess. This was during the time they were trying to get me to post there so I could be edited, but they might be right about that, anyway.
quote:
Ah ha, thank you my dubious potentate of all that is known. You have display, so elequently, how wrong you were, how wrong you can be, and how wrong is your perception about anything and everyone who does not agree with your egomanical beliefs
.
So what? He slanders 7th officers for his own entertainment and elevation of self, a tradition in Custerland for people who'd never have the wherewithal to do that to their face. I never served and I'm pretty sure I'm a coward, and I have no standing to denigrate combat vets, past or present. What annoys me greatly is that so very few in Custerland do, either, yet they toss around 'coward' as if they were qualified to do so.
quote:
dc, a casual perusal of this entire forum will reveal that you are the harbinger of lies and despicable posts. i have slandered no one but you. For that I am sorry for to do so reduces my morale to your substandard status. Please understand this. despite your past success in disrupting this forum you will not succeed this time. Benteen, Heavyrunner, and myself will always be here to point out the reality of what you are. A lowly, insignificant piss-ant that no one likes. Although you have achieved the status of master on your forum, it is obvious that no one there likes you. you senseless, personal. and devious attacks on individuals have become boring, senseless, and altogether disgusting. You've lost son. No one believes you anymore. lastly, read a book. Any b ook! I've been telling you this for years. do this and you won't be forced to attack individuals to make a point. you could actually make intelligent statements.
|
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 20 2009 : 07:31:17 AM
|
quote:
Ranger, as I said, it was my opinion, and I wasn't stating it to start something. You had your say, I had mine. Let's leave it at that.
Benteen on this statement I agree it is opinion and one of the reasons to be here is to see others opinions and how they derived them. With evidence and opinion I have changed mine several times.
Night and day on this issue as well, I fear Ranger. Not to start anything here either. But I can't see it that way,
If you had left it as above then we would agree to disagree with a continuing of providing evidence and opinions. But you embed in your opinion a judgment of facts and account below is not an opinion it is a statement of fact by both of us.
because it really didn't happen that way. It did happen that way
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 20 2009 : 07:34:35 AM
|
i have slandered no one but you
Really Joe? |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 20 2009 : 10:24:53 AM
|
If anyone is dubious about the ethics of Mr. Wiggs, go to page 4 of topics here and read through Benteen's Orders, a long thread. Popcorn and caffeine required, but the comic tidbits are worth it. The poster 'Larsen' was on to Wiggs from the get-go. From that tome which went from 2004-5:
Wiggs, just who exactly do you think you're fooling? Your denial and your original statement use ALMOST EXACTLY the same words.
THE DENIAL: "I did not charge Benteen with failure to render aid to the troopers left behind on the valley floor."
THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT: "Benteen failed to render aid to 10 to 12 soldiers that HE obsevred being slaughtered in the valley."
I can't distinguish between these comments at all, except that in one you're obviously lying when you deny making the original statement.
The most disturbing thing about this is that you claim to have once been a police officer. It's scary to think that anybody was ever sent to jail based mainly on the sworn testimony of Officer Joseph Wiggs.
R. Larsen
Alert readers will note how at each stage of Wiggs being destroyed by his own lies, he apparently attributes it to the superior skills of his then current tormentors - which is everyone - with language. This is because he usually isn't smart enough to know where he got found out, as with his plagiarism. Rather than admit his fabrications and incompetencies, he tries to mimic the cadence and format style of his antagonists and use those perceived weapons against them or others at later dates, still without a clue as to the humor of the internal puns and references, the internal intensifiers or literary references, and all that atop not having the slightest idea of what he's talking about or, worse, what others are, anyway. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on November 20 2009 10:58:17 AM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 20 2009 : 11:15:46 AM
|
DC,
I am not sure of which topic you are referring to, perhaps Crown Law... Responsibilities thread? If so, I take it you may have meant page 3. In that instance from what I read there, Joe was defending a position well known to history, where Crazy Horse was engaged with Reno's forces and had crossed the LBH, recrossed it and either went back up Deep Ravine (Joe's version) or around the north side and up a coulee there, and from the north side of where the monument stands attacked Custer's position. Since no one really knows which version is or should one say was correct, who is to say Joe was not correct? With Indian statements the way they were, no one really knows, so I did not see any problems with what Joe presented, nor for that matter what anyone else presented; it was opinions, and that was all there was to it. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 20 2009 : 6:09:16 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
DC,
I am not sure of which topic you are referring to, perhaps Crown Law... Responsibilities thread? If so, I take it you may have meant page 3. In that instance from what I read there, Joe was defending a position well known to history, where Crazy Horse was engaged with Reno's forces and had crossed the LBH, recrossed it and either went back up Deep Ravine (Joe's version) or around the north side and up a coulee there, and from the north side of where the monument stands attacked Custer's position. Since no one really knows which version is or should one say was correct, who is to say Joe was not correct? With Indian statements the way they were, no one really knows, so I did not see any problems with what Joe presented, nor for that matter what anyone else presented; it was opinions, and that was all there was to it.
The directions were clear maybe this can help. The Benteen's order thread is on that page.
http://www.mohicanpress.com/messageboard2/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=8&sortorder=1&whichpage=4 |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 20 2009 : 8:55:16 PM
|
First of all to bring up something that is 5 to 6 years old, in my opinion, speaks for itself. My advice would be leave it in the past and move on.
I did find a few worthy tidbits of information worth discussing:
Courtesy of DC:
quote:
Why was Custer 'forced' to send a reconossaince in force? Why not just a scout?
If Benteen 'brought' the packs, how fast could he be?
Would a rational command order the packs to rush ahead, letting dropped boxes lay, and in essence opening a share program of ammo with the enemy? Hours before they'd gone bananas over a few bread boxes that were dropped in the night.
Once encumbered with wounded and the packs, what offensive moves were open to Benteen and Reno given the proximity to the village and the condition of the command? Offensive moves with plausible goal, I mean, given the enemy was not running and the command couldn't hit anything. As it turned out, they had barely enough to protect them in the heart of enemy territory, much less utilize them in sustained offensive against a numerically superior enemy.
Any feet of fire acrobatics should have been utilized by Custer to return to his command.
It seems as though DC is interested in the battle and does at times ask pertinent questions which few bothered to answer. So, I will do it here.
quote:
If Benteen 'brought' the packs, how fast could he be?
The easiest way to answer this one is with another question. How fast was Hare's mission AND their return with JUST the ammo packs? Because it was the ammo packs that was needed and requested.
quote:
Would a rational command order the packs to rush ahead, letting dropped boxes lay, and in essence opening a share program of ammo with the enemy? Hours before they'd gone bananas over a few bread boxes that were dropped in the night.
It would. It would if that "command order" was in desperate need of reinforcement and ammo packs. And that is the difference between the two different times you state. One not under battle conditions, the other under battle conditions.
quote:
Once encumbered with wounded and the packs, what offensive moves were open to Benteen and Reno given the proximity to the village and the condition of the command?
Benteen was never "encumbered" with the pack train detail that day, that was clearly McDougall's responsibility. Only Benteen could have interpreted the orders that way. But those orders didn't direct him to take charge of it, nor did it direct him to protect it. It asked him to provide assistance in accorandance with the ammo packs, and to bring them, that was all.
quote:
Offensive moves with plausible goal, I mean, given the enemy was not running and the command couldn't hit anything. As it turned out, they had barely enough to protect them in the heart of enemy territory, much less utilize them in sustained offensive against a numerically superior enemy.
And just what was the nature of Benteen's orders given to him by Gen. Custer on his mission "left"? These were never rescinded. Benteen by his own admission at the COI disobeyed them. And thus we get this conclusion by you: "Any feet of fire acrobatics should have been utilized by Custer to return to his command." AND NOT BENTEEN who was duly ordered to do WHAT?
Don't worry DC, we are not always in such a disagreement. I do agree with you at times. Sometimes you do say some things that are actually on the mark, like this:
quote:
"But nobody is arguing or has argued for decades that Custer disobeyed Terry's orders. That's not just kicking a dead horse,it's grave robbing of an old argument to distract attention..."
I couldn't agree more. 
But as for your assertions about 5 years ago on Joe's post, forget it will you. Let sleeping dogs lie. Or as Heavyrunner said:
quote:
The argument here is taking longer than the battle, itself.
And will do so again if you persist, and you know it.
The best summary that came from all of it was this by Lorenzo G.
quote:
But falsely accusing Benteen of deliberately letting people die isn't mean? Your quote DC.
quote:
Much of what you said about Custer, it is not more tender of this. If other people cannot acting so, this must be the same for you too. Custer was not an idiot or a killer as Bentenn was not too. Personally, i simply think that from the first mythicizing of Custer, the opinion is passed to demonization and this I can't accept it. I hate this. If he does wrong that damned day, other officiers too did. Problem is that other officiers was there to make an account and a defense for themselves but Custer not because he died fighting with his men. Nelson Miles could answer to you as he did: "To blame defeat at Little Big Horn on Custer is kick a dead lion". You have talk also about private problems (voices and suspiscions, you add then that you're not interested on it) of Custer out of Little Big Horn, but then, what's about court martial of Benteen that he had to face 1887 for "conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman"? You did'nt talk about it. In his writings about Custer he had gone so far in prejudices, anger, hate, to become ridiculous. No one is perfect.
Take that last line to heart DC. Not even you, I, Joe, HR or Az is. Let it go.
Benteen
|
Edited by - Benteen on November 20 2009 9:05:07 PM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 21 2009 : 9:04:20 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
.
R. Larsen[/i]
Alert readers will note how at each stage of Wiggs being destroyed by his own lies, he apparently attributes it to the superior skills of his then current tormentors - which is everyone - with language. This is because he usually isn't smart enough to know where he got found out, as with his plagiarism. Rather than admit his fabrications and incompetencies, he tries to mimic the cadence and format style of his antagonists and use those perceived weapons against them or others at later dates, still without a clue as to the humor of the internal puns and references, the internal intensifiers or literary references, and all that atop not having the slightest idea of what he's talking about or, worse, what others are, anyway.
Hi dc, is this the same Larsent who ranted and raved and, insisted that I created and posted a thesis regarding Sitting Bull's supposed thoughts regarding Custer as they met in the afterlife. The same Larsent who demanded that I post my references for this alleged conversation. Who screamed that Indians would never say such a thing. The same Larsent whom I ignored for some time because I felt he had no right to demand anything from me or, anyone else for that matter.
The same Larsent who, like you, referred to me as a "liar" when he had no idea who I was, what I was, or what I may become; much like yourself. The same Larsent whom, when I finally got fed up and chastised him for calling me disparaging names, denied doing so.
The same Larsent who, apparently, became embarrassed when I pulled up his posts and proved that he, in fact, was guilty of lying as I posted his rants and false allegations confirming his guilt.
The same larsent, who from that very day ceased to post threads and, has not done so since? Oh yea, I remember him. Wasn't he your brother?PS, don't wait so long to post next time. It is true that your posts are absolutely devoid of value but, what the hey;they are interesting! |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 21 2009 : 9:46:25 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
Benteen I would think women would be offended by Joe posing as one. There is no argument Joe posted as a 61 year old female. It was exposed when Joe denied it. If you don't want to hear it don't bring it up. It was you that brought up a name from another board when it suited your purpose. So get off you soap box you are disingenuous.
As far as Terry's order and his defense of his plan it is there for anyone to read in many books. I am comfortable with my opinion on orders having spoken with enough officers to form my opinion.
If it is anyone thinking that they have it figured out it is you Benteen. You don't like it when others post alternatives to you. I don't believe all these officers lied and see more simple explanations. You state things are fact which are not.
AZ Ranger
I am lambasted! Look who is accusing someone of "not liking it when others post alternatives." The arch defender of a drunk Reno who embarrassed the Army so much that they had to save him to avoid a total disgrace. az, you are unbelievable. You have no credibility what so ever. But, I would honestly miss you if you stopped posting. You and dc afford the forum so many wonderful perspectives.
Ps A point of clarification, "amusing perspectives." |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 22 2009 : 1:36:44 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
.
R. Larsen[/i]
Alert readers will note how at each stage of Wiggs being destroyed by his own lies, he apparently attributes it to the superior skills of his then current tormentors - which is everyone - with language. This is because he usually isn't smart enough to know where he got found out, as with his plagiarism. Rather than admit his fabrications and incompetencies, he tries to mimic the cadence and format style of his antagonists and use those perceived weapons against them or others at later dates, still without a clue as to the humor of the internal puns and references, the internal intensifiers or literary references, and all that atop not having the slightest idea of what he's talking about or, worse, what others are, anyway.
Hi dc, is this the same Larsent who ranted and raved and, insisted that I created and posted a thesis regarding Sitting Bull's supposed thoughts regarding Custer as they met in the afterlife. The same Larsent who demanded that I post my references for this alleged conversation. Who screamed that Indians would never say such a thing. The same Larsent whom I ignored for some time because I felt he had no right to demand anything from me or, anyone else for that matter.
The same Larsent who, like you, referred to me as a "liar" when he had no idea who I was, what I was, or what I may become; much like yourself. The same Larsent whom, when I finally got fed up and chastised him for calling me disparaging names, denied doing so.
The same Larsent who, apparently, became embarrassed when I pulled up his posts and proved that he, in fact, was guilty of lying as I posted his rants and false allegations confirming his guilt.
The same larsent, who from that very day ceased to post threads and, has not done so since? Oh yea, I remember him. Wasn't he your brother?PS, don't wait so long to post next time. It is true that your posts are absolutely devoid of value but, what the hey;they are interesting!
No Joe it is not the same larsent. I see no posts by larsent.
So Joe if almost everyone that calls you a liar leaves because they tired of dealing with a liar then why do think there is not many people here?
There is no way to know whether someone is gone and hasn't come back. You were Joesph Wiggs and deleted your account you came back as Joe Wiggs. Safe to assume it is the same person. Not so with morning star, Reddirt, Pohanka, Pohanka jy, and realbird. How would you know if someone anonymous is not Larsen?
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 22 2009 1:58:56 PM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 22 2009 : 5:55:03 PM
|
| "I see no post of Larsen." Your friend dc quoted the post in his thread, did you not see it? It is still there on another forum. did you think that this present forum is the only one? Unfortunately, I have been unable to download the main page for quite sometime or I would do so. Why not ask dc to assist you. He knows where it is and, the both of you are so close. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 22 2009 : 8:26:09 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
"I see no post of Larsen." Your friend dc quoted the post in his thread, did you not see it? It is still there on another forum. did you think that this present forum is the only one? Unfortunately, I have been unable to download the main page for quite sometime or I would do so. Why not ask dc to assist you. He knows where it is and, the both of you are so close.
Show us Larson in your post below:
Hi dc, is this the same Larsent who ranted and raved and, insisted that I created and posted a thesis regarding Sitting Bull's supposed thoughts regarding Custer as they met in the afterlife. The same Larsent who demanded that I post my references for this alleged conversation. Who screamed that Indians would never say such a thing. The same Larsent whom I ignored for some time because I felt he had no right to demand anything from me or, anyone else for that matter.
The same Larsent who, like you, referred to me as a "liar" when he had no idea who I was, what I was, or what I may become; much like yourself. The same Larsent whom, when I finally got fed up and chastised him for calling me disparaging names, denied doing so.
The same Larsent who, apparently, became embarrassed when I pulled up his posts and proved that he, in fact, was guilty of lying as I posted his rants and false allegations confirming his guilt.
The same larsent, who from that very day ceased to post threads and, has not done so since? Oh yea, I remember him. Wasn't he your brother?PS, don't wait so long to post next time. It is true that your posts are absolutely devoid of value but, what the hey;they are interesting!
Not there is it?
and this statement of mine is correct:
No Joe it is not the same larsent. I see no posts by larsent.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 22 2009 : 8:33:30 PM
|
I am lambasted! Look who is accusing someone of "not liking it when others post alternatives." The arch defender of a drunk Reno who embarrassed the Army so much that they had to save him to avoid a total disgrace. az, you are unbelievable. You have no credibility what so ever. But, I would honestly miss you if you stopped posting. You and dc afford the forum so many wonderful perspectives.
Ps A point of clarification, "amusing perspectives."
A false presentation of fact is not an acceptable alternative. I know you can not understand the concept. You get challenged on the factual basis of your comments. Viable differing alternatives exist that are consistent with facts, testimonies, and accounts.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 22 2009 8:34:43 PM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 24 2009 : 10:01:05 PM
|
| "A false presentation of facts" sounds so professional. One would think we were in a Perry Mason movie rather than a web site involving open discussion about a historical battle that is of interest to all of us. Oh I forgot, most of us are, then there's you again. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 25 2009 : 09:53:17 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
"A false presentation of facts" sounds so professional. One would think we were in a Perry Mason movie rather than a web site involving open discussion about a historical battle that is of interest to all of us. Oh I forgot, most of us are, then there's you again.
So you think presenting false statements is OK? |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 25 2009 : 2:42:37 PM
|
Absolutely not.
There have been no false statements on this board. Just you and dc scrutinizing every word and paragraph in hopes of finding one little gray spot that can be used to twist, flip-flop- and denigrate others. you do realize that no other but you two constantly do this. It is often referred to as a smoke screen to cover up issues when the used is unable to respond intelligently. |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 25 2009 : 9:53:37 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
There were a few officers that performed admirably that day.
Godfrey established a skirmish line on the retreat to Weir's Point that, in all probably, prevented Reno's command from being wiped out as well as Custer.
Joe that is basic tactics not something exception but standard
quote:
This is possibly, I'm not sure, but it just may be the most preposterous statement you have ever made. you state before the forum that no one performed admirably in this battle. I show you several examples of outstanding performance that saved Reno's command and you relegate these efforts to the trash bin. Anything to be right huh az, any port in the storm. you are absolutely amazing
.
An Indian sharpshooter was systematically picking off troopers from Sharpshooters ridge When French and others fired toward the warrior and silenced him. While shots were being fired all about him, it is said that French calmly dug out stuck rounds from carbines without flinching.
Again basic, What do you think they brought their weapons for?
quote:
az, listen up. Soldiers were dieing. They were being picked off one by one. Men were loosing their wits and their stomachs and, the possibility of panic threatened to overwhelm them. French's "aim" saved the day. Weapons brought to battle do not automatically equate weapons used effectively
.
Benteen, with enemy rounds about him and men begging him to take cover demanded that Reno reinforce his line of the battlefield and, personally led a charge against encroaching warriors.
Did Benteen lead the charge or form it? Did Reno go on the charge?
quote:
There were two charges. One was definitely led by Benteen. It has been alleged that Reno assisted in a second charge.
Lt. Varnum, during Reno's "charge" the Lt. halted to succor his orderly, Elijah Strode, who had been shot.
Retrogrades are preformed using many tactics.
quote:
I have no idea what this means. Sorry!
The problem is that the officers and men who did not do as well was an embarrassment to the proud and elite 7th.
The 7th may have been proud bit they were not elite
quote:
Who died and made you judge of what the 7th was referred too!
None of your examples show officers making decisions that increased the offensive nature of the action. All your examples are individuals or defensive in nature. The 7th was on offense but the Indians forced them to defense. There was only one medal that could be awarded and that was the medal of honor. Many were awarded to the troopers. How many were awarded to officers?
quote:
My examples are of officers who made a difference. Men who defied danger, death, and confusion to perform as soldiers. your unsubstantiated allegation to the contrary is ludicrous.
The only offense was Reno charging down the valley and forming a skirmish line. From there on it went to defense withdrawing to the timber and a retrograde. Custer, Benteen, and the pack train were on the defense when the major engagements occurred. There was no outstanding offensive action by the 7th in my opinion.
Your opinion is certainly yours. I can think of no one would want it.
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 26 2009 : 11:09:02 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
Absolutely not.
There have been no false statements on this board. Just you and dc scrutinizing every word and paragraph in hopes of finding one little gray spot that can be used to twist, flip-flop- and denigrate others. you do realize that no other but you two constantly do this. It is often referred to as a smoke screen to cover up issues when the used is unable to respond intelligently.
So if Larsen called you a liar then your above statement makes it so.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 26 2009 : 11:14:01 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
Absolutely not.
There have been no false statements on this board. Just you and dc scrutinizing every word and paragraph in hopes of finding one little gray spot that can be used to twist, flip-flop- and denigrate others. you do realize that no other but you two constantly do this. It is often referred to as a smoke screen to cover up issues when the used is unable to respond intelligently.
So if Larsen called you a liar then your above statement makes it so.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 26 2009 : 11:17:48 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
There were a few officers that performed admirably that day.
Godfrey established a skirmish line on the retreat to Weir's Point that, in all probably, prevented Reno's command from being wiped out as well as Custer.
Joe that is basic tactics not something exception but standard
quote:
This is possibly, I'm not sure, but it just may be the most preposterous statement you have ever made. you state before the forum that no one performed admirably in this battle. I show you several examples of outstanding performance that saved Reno's command and you relegate these efforts to the trash bin. Anything to be right huh az, any port in the storm. you are absolutely amazing
.
An Indian sharpshooter was systematically picking off troopers from Sharpshooters ridge When French and others fired toward the warrior and silenced him. While shots were being fired all about him, it is said that French calmly dug out stuck rounds from carbines without flinching.
Again basic, What do you think they brought their weapons for?
quote:
az, listen up. Soldiers were dieing. They were being picked off one by one. Men were loosing their wits and their stomachs and, the possibility of panic threatened to overwhelm them. French's "aim" saved the day. Weapons brought to battle do not automatically equate weapons used effectively
.
Benteen, with enemy rounds about him and men begging him to take cover demanded that Reno reinforce his line of the battlefield and, personally led a charge against encroaching warriors.
Did Benteen lead the charge or form it? Did Reno go on the charge?
quote:
There were two charges. One was definitely led by Benteen. It has been alleged that Reno assisted in a second charge.
Lt. Varnum, during Reno's "charge" the Lt. halted to succor his orderly, Elijah Strode, who had been shot.
Retrogrades are preformed using many tactics.
quote:
I have no idea what this means. Sorry!
The problem is that the officers and men who did not do as well was an embarrassment to the proud and elite 7th.
The 7th may have been proud bit they were not elite
quote:
Who died and made you judge of what the 7th was referred too!
None of your examples show officers making decisions that increased the offensive nature of the action. All your examples are individuals or defensive in nature. The 7th was on offense but the Indians forced them to defense. There was only one medal that could be awarded and that was the medal of honor. Many were awarded to the troopers. How many were awarded to officers?
quote:
My examples are of officers who made a difference. Men who defied danger, death, and confusion to perform as soldiers. your unsubstantiated allegation to the contrary is ludicrous.
The only offense was Reno charging down the valley and forming a skirmish line. From there on it went to defense withdrawing to the timber and a retrograde. Custer, Benteen, and the pack train were on the defense when the major engagements occurred. There was no outstanding offensive action by the 7th in my opinion.
Your opinion is certainly yours. I can think of no one would want it.
AZ Ranger
At the time of this battle awards were given for acts done by individuals that exceeded standards which officers were awarded the medals?
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 29 2009 : 7:36:18 PM
|
Are you suggesting that the historical events of bravery are standard responses in warfare. You made a statement that everyone involved in this battle performed badly. When I pointed out how incorrect you were, you immediately denigrated these brave actions with the quaint "thats what they bring weapons for."
Are you implying that you contradict the history of warfare by alleging that that ever soldier armed with a "weapon" performs in the same manner? If so, please, again, post your resource. If you find one, just one I will write you a blank check. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 30 2009 : 10:35:25 AM
|
Originally posted by joe wiggs
Are you suggesting that the historical events of bravery are standard responses in warfare. You made a statement that everyone involved in this battle performed badly. When I pointed out how incorrect you were, you immediately denigrated these brave actions with the quaint "thats what they bring weapons for."
Let's start with my original statement that shows that you lie Joe.
Sounds fair enough to me. There were no outstanding performances for officers that day. At the same token I believed they acted within acceptable ranges for officers. The nature of hitting a moving target of unknown size with the exception to the rule of flight is what I believe was the major factors influencing the outcome.
Are you implying that you contradict the history of warfare by alleging that that ever soldier armed with a "weapon" performs in the same manner? If so, please, again, post your resource. If you find one, just one I will write you a blank check.
[/quote]
Insufficient funds |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Custer's Plan
