| Author |
 Topic  |
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - November 03 2009 : 08:25:16 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
Ranger,
Last post first, and so on until I get to your first post.
quote:
after “Girard came back” and reported the BIG village on the move about 3 miles away?
quote:
What is the reference for the above?
Pg. 84, RCOI, 6th answer,
That is a perfect example. The Big Village does not appear nor does 3 miles appear on Page 84 RCOI, 6th answer in Nichols book. You substitute your opinion which I believe is error. Girard sees the village when on the knoll near the river and the Indians are coming to meet Reno. He then states he reports it to Cooke. Again do you think it is physically possible to up Reno Creek and see the village from the first knoll? The second knoll is near Ford A and only parts of the village are visible from there.
A few minutes before Major Reno received his orders (the one Cooke gave to Reno) I rode up a little knoll near where there was a lodge with some dead Indians in it, and from this knoll I could see the town (note not a small village), the Indian tepees (still standing, Plural, more than one) and ponies. I turned my horse sideways and took off my hat and waved it and then I hallooed to Gen. Custer, “here are your Indians, running like devils.” And I rode down from that knoll and joined Gen. Custer and he was still marching on.
No Big Village no mileage
Explanation,
He stated that he heard Custer give the order to Reno, so he had to have been within earshot to have done so. Yet even Girard gets the sequencing wrong.
Several reported incidents and sequencing,
Pg 112, here he adds to his “running like devils” statement, saying; “I rode down and I think Gen. Custer and others went up there to see them." And he wasn’t sure of anything at this point because of the sequence, which is the point you brought up before.
Varnum’s statements also betray that he knew more than he was telling. It was said of him, “As he started off, Varnum shouted out to Wallace, "Come on Nick, with the fighting men. I don't stay back with the Coffee coolers." Custer than gave Wallace permission to go.” So at this time Varnum did know of those order Custer gave to Reno. Yet, pg 139 he stated concerning that order, “I did not hear any, I was not present.” Custer himself told him “where they were going”, this he did not mention at the court.
Wallace was free to move in the Regiment until the time it split with Reno taking the advance move to contact. At that point Wallace may need permission to go with Reno instead of the main body but it did not change his free movement to that point.
Varnum also had observed this Big village and made this statement, pg 140, “There were more Indians than I ever saw before. I had seen immense numbers of Indians from the top of the bluffs while out scouting and knew there was a large village there.” Custer received this information when? That’s correct, just after Reno had departed Custer; right after Custer gave Reno those direct orders. It was during this time that Girard then made his famous “running like devils” observation, for he had left the column to go to the knoll after Reno departed, which was a mere 50 yards from the tepee where those orders were given to Reno. Girard remembers where those orders had been given on pg 85, Question 1, answer 1: I suppose it was twenty-five or thirty yards away from that lodge…It might have been more (where Reno received those orders). I know it was but a very short time after I left the lodge that he received these orders.”
So which statement was correct? “after he left the lodge” or after he left the knoll? Sequence is everything here, and understanding that sequence correctly for many after a 3 year lapse could indeed become confusing. And if you don’t think Varnum told Custer of these facts, “I had seen immense numbers of Indians from the top of the bluffs while out scouting and knew there was a large village there.” Then he would have been derelict in his scouting duties. The court never asked this, but tell Custer, he did. If Custer had any doubts as to what both Varnum and Girard reported to him he allayed and fears of that by “going to the knoll” himself to have a look see. It was in this period of time that he sent Cooke, again, to give him the orders Davern witnessed him giving to Reno a short time later.
First from the divide the scouts knew there was a large village. Whether Custer believed them or not does not change the fact the scouts were right. Girard in his narrative in the Custer Myth states he sees a smaller camp moving toward the larger camp. What he describes is to the effect a small dark blob moving toward the large dark blob. I believe he was referencing persons and ponies/
I believe the part of the problem is that there is the first observation from the Crow's Nest and there are two knolls from which Girard makes observations. Also in accounts and testimony it appears that giving information not from the source is acceptable.
For example in Girard's account he state how the regiment was divided and the nature of Benteen's assignment. In Girard's RCOI testimony he states he did not even know that Benteen had left the main body.
I believe both the account and the testimony are correct. In the account it has collective knowledge and in the testimony it has Girard's personal knowledge.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
  |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 03 2009 : 08:44:29 AM
|
Again, the wrong way of looking at it. Read Edgerly’s testimony again, concerning miles and direction. Benteen was supposed to have swung around the left flank of Reno’s advance and hit the village from the west.
That is not at all what could be accomplished by going the direction Benteen went. We know for a fact that Custer was OK in the direction Benteen took. All reported orders are consistent with what Benteen did on the ground.
So ignoring the content of orders Benteen either has to return to Reno Creek or cross the LBH. The easiest route to do that is straight down Reno Creek. Since Benteen did not take that route there is no point on what the orders in a conspiracy theory were other than a recon in force.
So does your swing to the West have Benteen continuing straight to the LBH river crossing the LBH valley and climb the other side? Exactly how long would that take?
It is clear to me that Custer was making sure that the Indians did not escape to the south. Had nothing to do with attacking the Big Village that was not running and full of warriors ready to fight.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 03 2009 : 08:57:46 AM
|
Thanks, one has to put these things together in an intelligent manner in order to make any sense out of each one’s statements. The embedded information in each one’s testimony should be used the way I have done. The when and where according to proper sequence is what matters most. If it isn’t attempted, then no one will ever find out the truth.
Am I correct? I don’t know. I am not so inclined to believe that mine is any better or any worse than John Gray’s was. But I do not work off of any one theory or theories at all, I let the evidence lead me to the truth, not some notion of what others thought happened, but what the participants themselves told us happened. When someone premises a theory and then tries to find evidence for it, there is ample lies and mistatements to be found that will support it. Theory doen't prove it, their statements prove it.
I think that is all we can ask of for a theory. There is are plenty of those and they invite discussion. One should expect that when being challenged that the actual accounts and testimony will be presented to show the difference with the purposed theory.
Making everyone a liar that does not fit a theory I find unacceptable. Thats my personal approach to defend the accused unless I see clear evidence and motive to lie.
Ever notice that the liars are generally not in agreement with a formed theory. How often does anyone point out that someone got everything right but they think he is a liar. So does the theory come first and then the liars?
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 03 2009 09:04:03 AM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 03 2009 : 10:19:46 AM
|
quote:
No Big Village, No Mileage?
If I should have to attempt every single fact and not state such, should such an article not be written, such that the length be to boring in detail to describe their bathroom habits as well. Should I have to state what was obviously there in further testimony, there for all to witness? Good God man, get a grip as Joe would say.
As for the Big Village, by dictionary definition a “town” which he described what he saw as, it is:
1. large area of buildings: a densely populated area with many buildings, larger than a village and smaller than a city
2. urban area: a large urban area, either a town, a city, or a borough
And a Village?
1. rural community: a group of houses and other buildings in a rural area, smaller than a town but larger than a hamlet
2. small incorporated community: in some U.S. states, a community that is smaller than a town but that is similarly incorporated
It should be no stretch of anyone’s imagination as to what he observed, when one considers the difference between a village and a “town". And if one states this as a “BIG village”, what exactly would that have been?
As for the NO MILEAGE, again, anyone can with further research down that page can find at the bottom, what? Oh lord forbid, a stated mileage to that KNOLL, and that Tepee was from the LBH river. Who’s is misleading here, Ranger; me or you?
quote:
First from the divide the scouts knew there was a large village. Whether Custer believed them or not does not change the fact the scouts were right. Girard in his narrative in the Custer Myth states he sees a smaller camp moving toward the larger camp. What he describes is to the effect a small dark blob moving toward the large dark blob. I believe he was referencing persons and ponies/
You believe? This is an opinion, for which you continually criticize me for. Where’s the stated fact? Try looking above your 3 liner.
quote:
It is clear to me that Custer was making sure that the Indians did not escape to the south.
Sure enough, that was one of the facts brought out at the RCOI, and was the stated reason Custer sent Reno’s battalion there, [paraphrasing] “should the Indians attempt escape to the south” he, Custer sent Reno’s battalion there to block it. Custer we know went where? North perhaps? And who pray tell us was to block them from escaping to the West? And what, just what prevented them from escaping them to the East? The bluffs perhaps?
quote:
So does your swing to the West have Benteen continuing straight to the LBH river crossing the LBH valley and climb the other side? Exactly how long would that take?
That would depend on how far the stated “circuit” was, would it not? Hmmm… lets see, Benteen, 15 miles, Edgerly 16 miles, Godfrey 18 miles, take your pick. Less the mile or so from Fd “A” to Reno Hill, one gets 14 miles, 15 miles, & 17 miles. As it was a “circuit” they described one must halve it to find how far they went. So, 7 miles, 7.5 miles, & 9 miles, take your pick. As for route, pay attention to Edgerly’s account, for it was the most detailed.
quote:
I think that is all we can ask of for a theory. There is are plenty of those and they invite discussion. One should expect that when being challenged that the actual accounts and testimony will be presented to show the difference with the purposed theory.
What I have presented was NO THEORY. It was facts based upon the participants own statements. I will let other’s theorize, yourself included, as to what may have been possible or not.
And just because I have not gone into great detail, down to the last bit of information as to why someone stopped to fix a curb strap, and in the process took a leak to relieve himself and perhaps a dump as well; and with the the stated mileage as to the location one today would find this turd, does not mean, because I didn’t include it; that it is not there.
quote:
So does the theory come first and then the liars?
I don’t know, I deal in facts, NOT THEORIES. And my opinions are based upon those facts, and not derived from someone else’s notion of what they believe. Nor do I “make someone a liar". They do that themselves in their statements and testimony, & by what others through overwhelming evidence tell us was fact.
|
Edited by - Benteen on November 03 2009 10:34:16 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 04 2009 : 08:06:43 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
quote:
No Big Village, No Mileage?
If I should have to attempt every single fact and not state such, should such an article not be written, such that the length be to boring in detail to describe their bathroom habits as well. Should I have to state what was obviously there in further testimony, there for all to witness? Good God man, get a grip as Joe would say.
As for the Big Village, by dictionary definition a “town” which he described what he saw as, it is:
Apparently you are not familiar with western towns. One or two tents with a little wood structure here and there.You ignore that Girard states the small camp moves to the large camp.
1. large area of buildings: a densely populated area with many buildings, larger than a village and smaller than a city
2. urban area: a large urban area, either a town, a city, or a borough
I hope you are joking. There were no buildings.
And a Village?
1. rural community: a group of houses and other buildings in a rural area, smaller than a town but larger than a hamlet
2. small incorporated community: in some U.S. states, a community that is smaller than a town but that is similarly incorporated
Another joke right? Where are the buildings
It should be no stretch of anyone’s imagination as to what he observed, when one considers the difference between a village and a “town". And if one states this as a “BIG village”, what exactly would that have been?
Here in Arizona Indians live in permanent structures and were town like but how how many towns can move in one day? We have towns and cities and the population break is 10,000. So what?
As for the NO MILEAGE, again, anyone can with further research down that page can find at the bottom, what? Oh lord forbid, a stated mileage to that KNOLL, and that Tepee was from the LBH river. Who’s is misleading here, Ranger; me or you?
red]YOU[ because you don't include words such as I believe, or in my opinion, or in my theory or model
quote:
First from the divide the scouts knew there was a large village. Whether Custer believed them or not does not change the fact the scouts were right. Girard in his narrative in the Custer Myth states he sees a smaller camp moving toward the larger camp. What he describes is to the effect a small dark blob moving toward the large dark blob. I believe he was referencing persons and ponies/
You believe? This is an opinion, for which you continually criticize me for. Where’s the stated fact? Try looking above your 3 liner.
The underlined are they facts I am surprised you could not recognized them.
- scouts knew there was a large village
- the scouts were right
- Girard in his narrative in the Custer Myth states he sees a smaller camp moving toward the larger camp
quote:
It is clear to me that Custer was making sure that the Indians did not escape to the south. See the difference.
Sure enough, that was one of the facts brought out at the RCOI, and was the stated reason Custer sent Reno’s battalion there, [paraphrasing] “should the Indians attempt escape to the south” he, Custer sent Reno’s battalion there to block it. Custer we know went where? North perhaps? And who pray tell us was to block them from escaping to the West? And what, just what prevented them from escaping them to the East? The bluffs perhaps?
quote:
So does your swing to the West have Benteen continuing straight to the LBH river crossing the LBH valley and climb the other side? Exactly how long would that take?
That would depend on how far the stated “circuit” was, would it not? Hmmm… lets see, Benteen, 15 miles, Edgerly 16 miles, Godfrey 18 miles, take your pick. Less the mile or so from Fd “A” to Reno Hill, one gets 14 miles, 15 miles, & 17 miles. As it was a “circuit” they described one must halve it to find how far they went. So, 7 miles, 7.5 miles, & 9 miles, take your pick. As for route, pay attention to Edgerly’s account, for it was the most detailed.
One should read Ederly closely because he includes mileage down Reno Creek where he did not travel with Benteen. That would be a real help in figuring out how far they went.
quote:
I think that is all we can ask of for a theory. There is are plenty of those and they invite discussion. One should expect that when being challenged that the actual accounts and testimony will be presented to show the difference with the purposed theory.
What I have presented was NO THEORY(Agree). It was facts based upon iterpretation of the participants own statements. I will let other’s theorize, yourself included, as to what may have been possible or not.
It is not a fact when you insert Big Village and 3 miles into a statement that does not include those exact words. It is your opinion. One I do not share.
And just because I have not gone into great detail, down to the last bit of information as to why someone stopped to fix a curb strap, and in the process took a leak to relieve himself and perhaps a dump as well; and with the the stated mileage as to the location one today would find this turd, does not mean, because I didn’t include it; that it is not there.
Big Village and 3 miles is equivilent to "why someone stopped to fix a curb strap" I think not.
quote:
So does the theory come first and then the liars?
I don’t know, I deal in facts, NOT THEORIES. And my opinions are based upon those facts, and not derived from someone else’s notion of what they believe. Nor do I “make someone a liar". They do that themselves in their statements and testimony, & by what others through overwhelming evidence tell us was fact.
So how many of the liars do you include with your opinion then and what criteria do you use to eliminate them ?[/red]
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 04 2009 08:23:05 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 04 2009 : 09:13:30 AM
|
 |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 05 2009 : 02:31:55 AM
|
First Ranger, GET A GRIP ON REALITY.
Those quotes I used for the "town" and for the "village" was from where? And don't tell me that I didn't state it, because I DID. Care to try your analysis of that one again, or would you prefer me to find an antiquated one to serve your antiquated idealism.
As for that last post. "large black mass" could have been anything, anywhere, in any valley at any time. It could have been a lot of Obama supporters in 2012 when he's ousted. It could have been buffalo, deer, elk or bears. Or it could have been ponies, thousands of them. And from that distance does one suppose your going to see any human being without today's field grade field glasses? Remember, your idol here, Benteen said Custer never saw a thing. And your saying who, saw what? |
Edited by - Benteen on November 05 2009 02:32:37 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 05 2009 : 07:15:27 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
First Ranger, GET A GRIP ON REALITY.
Those quotes I used for the "town" and for the "village" was from where? And don't tell me that I didn't state it, because I DID. Care to try your analysis of that one again, or would you prefer me to find an antiquated one to serve your antiquated idealism.
As for that last post. "large black mass" could have been anything, anywhere, in any valley at any time. It could have been a lot of Obama supporters in 2012 when he's ousted. It could have been buffalo, deer, elk or bears. Or it could have been ponies, thousands
of them. And from that distance does one suppose your going to see any human being without today's field grade field glasses? Remember, your idol here, Benteen said Custer never saw a thing. And your saying who, saw what?
Let's see if you if your logic and conclusions below make sense. First look at my post below and look closely where I use the word believe. Then you ask of me You believe? and Where’s the stated fact
Then I post Girard's testimony from RCOI since you asked for it in the your two questions and then you state:
First Ranger, GET A GRIP ON REALITY
"large black mass" could have been anything
It could have been a lot of Obama supporters in 2012 when he's ousted
So I wonder who needs to get a grip?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First from the divide the scouts knew there was a large village. Whether Custer believed them or not does not change the fact the scouts were right. Girard in his narrative in the Custer Myth states he sees a smaller camp moving toward the larger camp. What he describes is to the effect a small dark blob moving toward the large dark blob. I believe he was referencing persons and ponies--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You believe? This is an opinion, for which you continually criticize me for. Where’s the stated fact? Try looking above your 3 liner.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 05 2009 : 07:35:55 AM
|
I don’t know, I deal in facts, NOT THEORIES. And my opinions are based upon those facts, and not derived from someone else’s notion of what they believe. Nor do I “make someone a liar". They do that themselves in their statements and testimony, & by what others through overwhelming evidence tell us was fact.
It is my opinion that you do not understand the difference between evidence and fact or you think you're the judge and make the determination and no one else can.
At the RCOI the judges determined fact from the evidence presented in the way the saw fit. Whether you agree or not will never change their finding of fact in regards to Major Reno. In 130 years it has not changed. Doesn't matter what new evidence, opinions, or theories it will always remain the finding of the Court of Inquiry in 1879.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 05 2009 : 10:30:41 AM
|
quote:
Girard in his narrative in the Custer Myth states he sees a smaller camp moving toward the larger camp
Prove it without "your interpretation", which you blame me for.
quote:
Then I post Girard's testimony from RCOI since you asked for it in the your two questions and then you state:
First Ranger, GET A GRIP ON REALITY
"large black mass" could have been anything
It could have been a lot of Obama supporters in 2012 when he's ousted
So I wonder who needs to get a grip?
The man's a Lame Duck already and he doesn't see it. Can't see it because he's blinded by his own stupidity.
quote:
First from the divide the scouts knew there was a large village. Whether Custer believed them or not does not change the fact the scouts were right. Girard in his narrative in the Custer Myth states he sees a smaller camp moving toward the larger camp. What he describes is to the effect a small dark blob moving toward the large dark blob. I believe he was referencing persons and ponies--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You believe? This is an opinion, for which you continually criticize me for. Where’s the stated fact? Try looking above your 3 liner.
quote:
First from the divide the scouts knew there was a large village. Whether Custer believed them or not does not change the fact the scouts were right.
And to make this JUDGEmental call, you have to do what Ranger? Call both Custer and Benteen liars?
quote:
What he describes is to the effect a small dark blob moving toward the large dark blob. I believe he was referencing persons and ponies-
For all you know it was just ponies moving. One smaller group going to the larger group where the grass was simply greener. There is NO Proof here. NONE. NADA. ZIP. Not one shred of evidence that what he saw was what you thought it was. Why? Because Custer's command suprized the bejesus out of that small encampment and they were running the last 5 miles down Reno Creek to the LBH river.
Custer's command at the time of discovery was only a mile or two away, if that. When Lt. Hare rode upon a knoll there, a knoll by the way Mekeeta, Bookwalter and Weibert all stated where it was located, and where the tepee was in relation to it. And it lay about 5 miles from the LBH. Lt. Hare then spotted them running down Reno creek, and from the sound of his narrative. one can tell they had not arrived there yet.
Proof you tell me Ranger, how long would it have taken scared and running Indians on Indian Ponies to have gone 5 miles?
quote:
What I have presented was NO THEORY(Agree). It was facts based upon iterpretation of the participants own statements. I will let other’s theorize, yourself included, as to what may have been possible or not.
It is not a fact when you insert Big Village and 3 miles into a statement that does not include those exact words. It is your opinion. One I do not share.
quote:
It was facts based upon iterpretation of the participants own statements.
No it isn't. It isn't. when it can be demonstrated or shown the fact as "they" stated it was true. And if you do not know your Boolean algerbra, get ready for a great demonstration of it.
Your own coveted Girard, stated that what he observed was a "town", and by dictionary definition a "town" is larger than a "village",IS IT NOT? Thus and therefore it is BIGger than a village and therefore could be by dictionary definition be classified as a BIG Village. Duh....
And as for the 3 miles, he did state that. I didn't put 3 miles in there, you took them away. Now go back to that page where your little black masses are, pg 111 and read further. Here let me assist you.
Q. Where were the Indians at the time you saw them from that little hill? [He meant knoll, a knoll is a little hill. And this shall be further demonstrated this is what he was referring to later in the testimony.]
A. They were down in the bottom of the LBH river.
Q. How far down the valley were they and on which side of the river?
A. I should say over three miles (3 miles) from where we were and I judged them to be on the left bank of the river.
Q. You were then about a mile and a half away from the ford, were you?
A. I said about a mile from the knoll to the ford.
Q. I understood you to say the knoll at the edge of the river was about a mile from where you saw the Indians and made the announcement to Gen. Custer. Am I right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then from the ford “A’ how far down the valley were the Indians when you caught sight of them?
A. I should say two or two and a half miles from us.
There is no mistaking where Girard’s 3 mile estimate was made from. It was made from the knoll located about 1 mile from Fd “A”. And when one adds that 1 mile to the mileage asked for from Ford “A”, and the referenced knoll there, to those Indians, at that same moment in time. One does indeed get 3 to 3 ½ miles.
I do not take things out of context Ranger, you do. And you’re trying to say Girard’s mileages are to be interpreted elsewhere than the court, than Girard himself stated?
quote:
"It is my opinion that you do not understand the difference between evidence and fact".
And it is clear that you Ranger do not understand the difference between opinion and fact, or for that matter, evidence and fact.
quote:
So does the theory come first and then the liars?
And as for your liars statement, I stand upon that which I have already stated:
I don’t know, I deal in facts, NOT THEORIES. And my opinions are based upon those facts, and not derived from someone else’s notion of what they believe. Nor do I “make someone a liar". They do that themselves in their statements and testimony, & by what others through overwhelming evidence tell us was fact.
|
Edited by - Benteen on November 05 2009 10:46:51 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 06 2009 : 09:04:07 AM
|
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Girard in his narrative in the Custer Myth states he sees a smaller camp moving toward the larger camp
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prove it without "your interpretation", which you blame me for.
The Custer Myth by Colonel W. A. Graham
F. F. GIRARD'S STORY OF THE CUSTER FIGHT
Pages 250 and 251
"About daybreak we reached Varnum and could see the large black mass moving in front and down the Little Bighorn and a dense cloud of dust over all and behind. The camp we had found was the smaller camp (the larger camp was downstream farther), and was on the way to the larger camp and this led us to believe the Indians were stampeded."
From now on you should do you own research.I can't help it if you don't have the book or are to lazy to look it up. You might discover Mathey did not have a company along the way.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 06 2009 09:15:26 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 06 2009 : 09:20:50 AM
|
Posted - Yesterday : 10:30:41 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Girard in his narrative in the Custer Myth states he sees a smaller camp moving toward the larger camp
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prove it without "your interpretation", which you blame me for.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then I post Girard's testimony from RCOI since you asked for it in the your two questions and then you state:
First Ranger, GET A GRIP ON REALITY
"large black mass" could have been anything
It could have been a lot of Obama supporters in 2012 when he's ousted
So I wonder who needs to get a grip?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The man's a Lame Duck already and he doesn't see it. Can't see it because he's blinded by his own stupidity.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First from the divide the scouts knew there was a large village. Whether Custer believed them or not does not change the fact the scouts were right. Girard in his narrative in the Custer Myth states he sees a smaller camp moving toward the larger camp. What he describes is to the effect a small dark blob moving toward the large dark blob. I believe he was referencing persons and ponies--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You believe? This is an opinion, for which you continually criticize me for. Where’s the stated fact? Try looking above your 3 liner.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First from the divide the scouts knew there was a large village. Whether Custer believed them or not does not change the fact the scouts were right.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And to make this JUDGEmental call, you have to do what Ranger? Call both Custer and Benteen liars?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What he describes is to the effect a small dark blob moving toward the large dark blob. I believe he was referencing persons and ponies-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For all you know it was just ponies moving. One smaller group going to the larger group where the grass was simply greener. There is NO Proof here. NONE. NADA. ZIP. Not one shred of evidence that what he saw was what you thought it was. Why? Because Custer's command suprized the bejesus out of that small encampment and they were running the last 5 miles down Reno Creek to the LBH river.
Custer's command at the time of discovery was only a mile or two away, if that. When Lt. Hare rode upon a knoll there, a knoll by the way Mekeeta, Bookwalter and Weibert all stated where it was located, and where the tepee was in relation to it. And it lay about 5 miles from the LBH. Lt. Hare then spotted them running down Reno creek, and from the sound of his narrative. one can tell they had not arrived there yet.
Proof you tell me Ranger, how long would it have taken scared and running Indians on Indian Ponies to have gone 5 miles?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What I have presented was NO THEORY(Agree). It was facts based upon iterpretation of the participants own statements. I will let other’s theorize, yourself included, as to what may have been possible or not.
It is not a fact when you insert Big Village and 3 miles into a statement that does not include those exact words. It is your opinion. One I do not share.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was facts based upon iterpretation of the participants own statements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No it isn't. It isn't. when it can be demonstrated or shown the fact as "they" stated it was true. And if you do not know your Boolean algerbra, get ready for a great demonstration of it.
Your own coveted Girard, stated that what he observed was a "town", and by dictionary definition a "town" is larger than a "village",IS IT NOT? Thus and therefore it is BIGger than a village and therefore could be by dictionary definition be classified as a BIG Village. Duh....
And as for the 3 miles, he did state that. I didn't put 3 miles in there, you took them away. Now go back to that page where your little black masses are, pg 111 and read further. Here let me assist you.
Q. Where were the Indians at the time you saw them from that little hill? [He meant knoll, a knoll is a little hill. And this shall be further demonstrated this is what he was referring to later in the testimony.]
A. They were down in the bottom of the LBH river.
Q. How far down the valley were they and on which side of the river?
A. I should say over three miles (3 miles) from where we were and I judged them to be on the left bank of the river.
Q. You were then about a mile and a half away from the ford, were you?
A. I said about a mile from the knoll to the ford.
Q. I understood you to say the knoll at the edge of the river was about a mile from where you saw the Indians and made the announcement to Gen. Custer. Am I right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then from the ford “A’ how far down the valley were the Indians when you caught sight of them?
A. I should say two or two and a half miles from us.
There is no mistaking where Girard’s 3 mile estimate was made from. It was made from the knoll located about 1 mile from Fd “A”. And when one adds that 1 mile to the mileage asked for from Ford “A”, and the referenced knoll there, to those Indians, at that same moment in time. One does indeed get 3 to 3 ½ miles.
I do not take things out of context Ranger, you do. And you’re trying to say Girard’s mileages are to be interpreted elsewhere than the court, than Girard himself stated?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It is my opinion that you do not understand the difference between evidence and fact".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And it is clear that you Ranger do not understand the difference between opinion and fact, or for that matter, evidence and fact.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So does the theory come first and then the liars?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And as for your liars statement, I stand upon that which I have already stated:
I don’t know, I deal in facts, NOT THEORIES. And my opinions are based upon those facts, and not derived from someone else’s notion of what they believe. Nor do I “make someone a liar". They do that themselves in their statements and testimony, & by what others through overwhelming evidence tell us was fact.
So did you lie when your account stated Mathey had a company? What fact did you base your statement on that Mathey had a company?
It is my opinion after reviewing the evidence that you had no factual basis to make the statement regarding Mathey having a company.
The rest of posts doesn't deserve a comment in my opinion. It would be a waste of my time.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 06 2009 09:31:10 AM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 06 2009 : 10:19:40 AM
|
What you do not understand Ranger are the broader implications of what I have stated. This goes way beyond our poor ability to determine whether you have lied or I have lied, or for that matter whether any other person still alive has lied. To subject one to such scrutiny; to devalue what historically was not only probable, possible and indeed factual, by calling that living person a liar, does not advance the cause which we all share a greater responsibility to find the truth. And you’re again missing a crucial piece of the puzzle.
Is it whether some historical fact is today misinterpreted, misjudged and misstated? It is whether some historical fact today is lied about? Has this been done before by others at the battle, and every since the LBH disaster which caused the controversy in the first place? Has your interpretation itself, no, not you Ranger, nor a reflection upon your character, but, your interpretation of events been proven otherwise during our conversation? Does that make any other statement of yours invalid? And in this regard any less important?
I will make no qualms or boast anything in regard to being wrong. And even here not deny that I was wrong in regard to what you claim. However, like in the past, from this time back to June 25th, 1876, you must determine whether or not I did that intentionally. And in that regard find a means, motive and opportunity for such a lie. Why indeed Ranger did I lie about Mathey‘s company? |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 06 2009 : 1:04:21 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
First Ranger, GET A GRIP ON REALITY.
As for that last post. "large black mass" could have been anything, anywhere, in any valley at any time. It could have been a lot of Obama supporters in 2012 when he's ousted. It could have been buffalo, deer, elk or bears. Or it could have been ponies, thousands
of them. And from that distance does one suppose your going to see any human being withThose quotes I used for the "town" and for the "village" was from where? And don't tell me that I didn't state it, because I DID. Care to try your analysis of that one again, or would you prefer me to find an antiquated one to serve your antiquated idealism. out today's field grade field glasses? Remember, your idol here, Benteen said Custer never saw a thing. And your saying who, saw what?
quote:
az, when you increase the font for you letters and paint them red does that mean you are mad!?!
AZ Ranger
|
Edited by - joe wiggs on November 06 2009 1:06:23 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 09:36:08 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
First Ranger, GET A GRIP ON REALITY.
As for that last post. "large black mass" could have been anything, anywhere, in any valley at any time. It could have been a lot of Obama supporters in 2012 when he's ousted. It could have been buffalo, deer, elk or bears. Or it could have been ponies, thousands
of them. And from that distance does one suppose your going to see any human being withThose quotes I used for the "town" and for the "village" was from where? And don't tell me that I didn't state it, because I DID. Care to try your analysis of that one again, or would you prefer me to find an antiquated one to serve your antiquated idealism. out today's field grade field glasses? Remember, your idol here, Benteen said Custer never saw a thing. And your saying who, saw what?
quote:
az, when you increase the font for you letters and paint them red does that mean you are mad!?!
AZ Ranger
Joe I like to use red internally within someone else's post that I commenting on for my posts to show new comments. I use the larger font for emphasis since Benteen has large posts. Notice that the large letters in your post are Benteen's.
Marines don't get mad. By the way what years were you a Marine Corps officer Joe?
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 07 2009 09:37:55 AM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 10:05:48 AM
|
| But you ENLARGED them Ranger, I did not. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 10:31:47 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
What you do not understand Ranger are the broader implications of what I have stated. This goes way beyond our poor ability to determine whether you have lied or I have lied, or for that matter whether any other person still alive has lied. To subject one to such scrutiny; to devalue what historically was not only probable, possible and indeed factual, by calling that living person a liar, does not advance the cause which we all share a greater responsibility to find the truth. And you’re again missing a crucial piece of the puzzle.
Is it whether some historical fact is today misinterpreted, misjudged and misstated? It is whether some historical fact today is lied about? Has this been done before by others at the battle, and every since the LBH disaster which caused the controversy in the first place? Has your interpretation itself, no, not you Ranger, nor a reflection upon your character, but, your interpretation of events been proven otherwise during our conversation? Does that make any other statement of yours invalid? And in this regard any less important?
I will make no qualms or boast anything in regard to being wrong. And even here not deny that I was wrong in regard to what you claim. However, like in the past, from this time back to June 25th, 1876, you must determine whether or not I did that intentionally. And in that regard find a means, motive and opportunity for such a lie. Why indeed Ranger did I lie about Mathey‘s company?
Actually if you read my post I stated that I did not believe you lied and pointed out it was a good example. Are you arguing with that?
I think you erred but did not lie.
Regards
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 10:34:38 AM
|
Exactly Benteen, this dude just don't get it. Another thing Einstein, marines do get mad as evident by the unfortunate veterans who seek help in dealing with post trauma stress. I believe you to be the only marine(?) I have ever discoverd to state such an unsubstantiated perspective.
Never said I was an marine officer az. I said I entered the Marine corp. Officer's program at Quantico the summer following my soph. year in college. As usual, you take a simple basic statement, twist it out of proportion and, re-invent it to suit your nefarious purpose. Please, for once, get your facts straight before your begin your impending, unsubstantiated allegations as you are wont to do. While you are at it, could you explain how your department has an active police officer on their roster who is 62 tears old. I simply can not understand your tenacity in toss stones while living in a glass house. |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 10:54:18 AM
|
Ranger.
You can't differentiate between an unintentional mistake and a lie, when someone does it here. How can you hope to ever discover if someone did it back in 1879, if you can't discern the difference now? There are clues in my posts Ranger that should tell you whether it was intentional or not. Get that detective cap on and figure it out. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 10:58:28 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
Exactly Benteen, this dude just don't get it. Another thing Einstein, marines do get mad as evident by the unfortunate veterans who seek help in dealing with post trauma stress. I believe you to be the only marine(?) I have ever discovered to state such an unsubstantiated perspective.
Never said I was an marine officer az. I said I entered the Marine corp. Officer's program at Quantico the summer following my soph. year in college. As usual, you take a simple basic statement, twist it out of proportion and, re-invent it to suit your nefarious purpose. Please, for once, get your facts straight before your begin your impending, unsubstantiated allegations as you are wont to do. While you are at it, could you explain how your department has an active police officer on their roster who is 62 tears old. I simply can not understand your tenacity in toss stones while living in a glass house.
Actually in a previous post I made note that you did not say you finished and became an officer. This time you answered which you could have done before. So your statements about you not bragging about being a Marine has a reason. You weren't.
My Department has several officers of 60 + years of age. We also have lots starting out in their 20s. We like our jobs is the simple reason. I have completed 30 years and have 5 more years if I feel like it. The Department has lots of training invested in its officers and values the senior officers.
Don't rush my age Joe I just turned 61 in September.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 11:11:55 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
But you ENLARGED them Ranger, I did not.
Look again Joe enlarged them first. I can not see in my posts where it is enlarged until after responding to Joe's enlargement. If you can show it to me then I erred if not you erred.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 11:12:44 AM
|
Ranger, are you sure you were'nt calling me a liar?
You posted this:
quote:
Nor do I “make someone a liar". They do that themselves in their statements and testimony, & by what others through overwhelming evidence tell us was fact.
So did you lie when your account stated Mathey had a company? What fact did you base your statement on that Mathey had a company?
It is my opinion after reviewing the evidence that you had no factual basis to make the statement regarding Mathey having a company.
The rest of posts doesn't deserve a comment in my opinion. It would be a waste of my time.
Why did you "feel" it was "a waste of (your) time", Ranger to not comment on the rest of my post, which had nothing here, to do with what I posted there? Was it because you felt I lied there, so why answer my post here?
Nice change of post there Ranger, And if I do want to emphasize something someone else posts, I captialize it not "enlarge" it, as you did.
But you still don't get it, just as Joe stated. |
Edited by - Benteen on November 07 2009 11:19:11 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 11:25:07 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
Ranger.
You can't differentiate between an unintentional mistake and a lie, when someone does it here. How can you hope to ever discover if someone did it back in 1879, if you can't discern the difference now? There are clues in my posts Ranger that should tell you whether it was intentional or not. Get that detective cap on and figure it out.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a very good point. Did Benteen lie about Mathey's company. I don't think so. I think he believed what he wrote in his account(post). I am also sure that if he sat and figured who had which companies he would come up 13 if Mathey had one company and realized something was wrong. I would guess that Benteen has spent more time studying this battle then all the survivors put together. I don't know how long it has been since Benteen has looked at the company break down but we know that some of the witnesses were testifying from recollection of several years past.
AZ Ranger
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“ A Cavalryman’s first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI
Do be so disingenuous. You did read this didn't you? Look at the third sentence of my quoted post. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 11:39:31 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
Ranger, are you sure you were'nt calling me a liar?
You posted this:
quote:
Nor do I “make someone a liar". They do that themselves in their statements and testimony, & by what others through overwhelming evidence tell us was fact.
So did you lie when your account stated Mathey had a company? What fact did you base your statement on that Mathey had a company?
It is my opinion after reviewing the evidence that you had no factual basis to make the statement regarding Mathey having a company.
The rest of posts doesn't deserve a comment in my opinion. It would be a waste of my time.
Yes I am sure that asking if you believe you lied when you stated that Mathey had a company is not calling you a liar. Again read my post.
quote:
This is a very good point. Did Benteen lie about Mathey's company. I don't think so. I think he believed what he wrote in his account(post). I am also sure that if he sat and figured who had which companies he would come up 13 if Mathey had one company and realized something was wrong. I would guess that Benteen has spent more time studying this battle then all the survivors put together. I don't know how long it has been since Benteen has looked at the company break down but we know that some of the witnesses were testifying from recollection of several years past.
AZ Ranger
Your answer should have be no I did not lie but I erred.(which you did admit and I see that as good and responsible showing integrity) That would be my belief which I all ready stated.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 07 2009 : 5:13:16 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
Exactly Benteen, this dude just don't get it. Another thing Einstein, marines do get mad as evident by the unfortunate veterans who seek help in dealing with post trauma stress. I believe you to be the only marine(?) I have ever discovered to state such an unsubstantiated perspective.
Never said I was an marine officer az. I said I entered the Marine corp. Officer's program at Quantico the summer following my soph. year in college. As usual, you take a simple basic statement, twist it out of proportion and, re-invent it to suit your nefarious purpose. Please, for once, get your facts straight before your begin your impending, unsubstantiated allegations as you are wont to do. While you are at it, could you explain how your department has an active police officer on their roster who is 62 tears old. I simply can not understand your tenacity in toss stones while living in a glass house.
Actually in a previous post I made note that you did not say you finished and became an officer. This time you answered which you could have done before. So your statements about you not bragging about being a Marine has a reason. You weren't.
My Department has several officers of 60 + years of age. We also have lots starting out in their 20s. We like our jobs is the simple reason. I have completed 30 years and have 5 more years if I feel like it. The Department has lots of training invested in its officers and values the senior officers.
Don't rush my age Joe I just turned 61 in September.
AZ Ranger
Police Departments, generally, hire candidates at the age of 21. Retirements are generally 20 years, 25, and 30. retirement is generally 55 % with inducements (unused leave,etc) to increase the rate to 75%.
An officer may stay longer as long as he or she is medically fit to do so. the question is, however, why would you?
I have a friend who retired upon achieving his 30th. year when he realized that with incentives the pay difference between his current salary and retirement was approximately 20 cents per hour.
He was 51 years old. Buddy, at 61 you must be paying your department to work! Just kidding! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Why Did Wallace Lie?
