| Author |
 Topic  |
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - November 26 2009 : 09:15:15 AM
|
http://www.mohicanpress.com/messageboard2/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=145&whichpage=8
bhist
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline
Posted - May 28 2004 : 02:41:24 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sorry, but I came into this late and just don’t have time to read all eight pages before writing my part. So, if I cover the same old ground, please forgive me.
This is a good question and it’s one that’s probably asked more than any other question regarding the LBH. Matter-of-fact, I asked the same question, to my panel, when I chaired the 1995 cbhma symposium. The panel members were Richard Fox, Brian Pohanka, and the late Joe Sills. I spent countless hours transcribing and editing the panel discussion for publication later that year, so for months I went to sleep thinking of Custer’s last message to Benteen.
I’ll share with you some of the responses from the panel, but first my response. It’s so easy to criticize Benteen’s actions while one sits in their recliner thumbing through hundreds of books and articles about this subject. The answer though is quite simple; Benteen did nothing wrong, and he did not disobey orders. He didn’t disobey orders any worse than Custer did in regards to his orders from Terry.
Fighting Indians in 1876 is quite the opposite of fighting Iraqis in 2004 – the strategy may be the same, but the circumstances are different due to time, distance, and forms (or lack there of) of communications. Benteen and Reno had to do what they did because of their situations. They would’ve been dammed if they’d left their wounded to be cut-down by Indian boys as the suicide mission rode off to find Custer.
So, what did the other panel members have to say regarding this subject?
First my question to them:
“Benteen has Custer’s last message put away in his pocket when he comes to Reno’s rescue on Reno Hill. Viewing the remnants of Reno’s men coming up the hill, demoralized, scared, wounded, Benteen must be perplexed as to what to do. Looking around he sees no sign of Custer; Reno doesn’t know where Custer is. Benteen decides to stay put and help organize these men into a fighting force once again. Was Benteen right or was he wrong in ignoring the last message from Custer? Even if Benteen had decided to go in search of Custer, could Reno have legally ordered Benteen to stay?
Responses – condensed –if you read only one part then read the final few paragraphs under Sills…those should open your eyes!!
Pohanka:
Remember what the message said, “Come on…” Come on where? If this became an issue, Benteen could have said that he saw an emergency that had to be dealt with. Reno was a Major and Benteen a Captain, so if Reno had ordered Benteen to do something, then Benteen would have had to do it. Benteen judged Reno to have been affected by what happened. Benteen is no doubt grappling with this problem and at the same time as he is trying to deal with other problems in the Reno battalion. I tend to agree with what 2nd Lt. Edgerly later said, that if they had gone further north they would probably have died.
Another thing with this is I think we tend to impose a modem view (two World Wars, Vietnam, a Pentagon military-industrial complex view) on the 19th century. There may well be somewhere in a 19th century manual an answer to the question: Does a Captain have the right to overrule a Major if he is carrying an order from a superior? I'm not interested in what it is today. I'm interested in what it was then. And I would hazard to guess that it was not that cut and dried in the 19th century.
I could talk about the great disaster the British had at Isandhlwana where the Zulus' wiped out a battalion and half of the 24th Regiment (Anglo - Zulu War 1879). It happened precisely because nobody could agree who was in command. You had a Royal Engineer Colonel commanding white volunteers. You had a Red Coated Major commanding white infantry and both sort of thought the other guy was in charge. The Colonel thought the Major was in charge because the Colonel was only commanding his native troops. The Major thought the Colonel was in charge because he was a Colonel and he was a Major. I don't think it was cut and dried in the 19th century.
We know what Benteen thought of Custer. We know he thought Custer was a pompous ass. We know that Benteen probably thought he had been purposely sent off on a wild goose chase to be kept out of the battle. And, I'm sure that Benteen thought that Custer wanted him to be quick and wants him to bring packs, but these are mutually exclusive things.
There are obviously solutions to that. Benteen could have forged ahead with some of the companies. Remember, Benteen did not just proceed at a crawl. Many who were with him testified that they moved; they were not just creeping along. The most vicious accusation that could ever be made about Benteen is that he wanted Custer to die. I've seen a letter that Lt. Gibson wrote to the brother of Mrs. Yates. It was a hateful diatribe against Reno, Benteen and everybody that ever crossed Custer's path in a negative way. It implied that Benteen was slow and dragged his heels because he wanted Custer to die. I think that Benteen was shocked and horrified when the wheels in his head began to turn after that battle. I think he is as much a victim of the aftermath as men like Weir and French. I think that Benteen began to second guess his actions in his way, it wasn't to drink himself to death like Weir and French did; his reaction was to become even more entrenched and hateful and cynical and bitter. This is reflected, of course, in his later writing.
Fox:
The way that the situation played out at the time, I think was a demonstration that people were quite comfortable with Benteen’s decision.
I think most of our questions and ponderings take place knowing the ultimate results of what happened. We know that Custer and all his men died. So, when we read a message to bring packs and be quick we might think ammunition. But, we are thinking in retrospect. I think that Custer wanted Benteen to be quick. He didn't say for the packs to be quick, he said to be quick and then he said to bring packs. It's hard to be quick and bring packs at the same time. The point is, here is a pack train hanging out there and the action is about to start and so what you want to do is consolidate so everyone can operate together. I don't see any dire situation in that message.
Sills:
The officer who chooses to disobey an order should have a good reason for not doing so. I think Benteen would be perfectly justified, given the situation he came upon. What would you expect him to do, ride by and wave? Seriously, you have to ask yourself that question. There were wounded, disarmed, dismounted, disorganized soldiers coming up the top of that bluff. What does Benteen do? I think his primary function may be to the regiment as a whole, irrespective of the order of the commanding officer. Remember, Benteen does not know that Custer is in trouble and in fact Custer is not in trouble. Custer's last message signifies no trouble! It doesn't signify difficulty at all. Custer hasn't fired a round when he sent that message to Benteen.
When the message was dispatched. Custer had not seen the full extent of the Indian village. Benteen and Reno had not seen the full extent of the village and were aware only in terms of numbers of those who faced Reno. None of them were aware that there might be many more warriors around than they suspected. And, they knew what had happened to Reno with few soldiers. Custer had twice as many soldiers.
Benteen is sent a message at a point in time where Custer at that point does not know exactly where Benteen is. Has Benteen continued on further to the southwest than he in fact did? Remember, Custer learns of Benteen's position only when Boston arrives and Boston passes the last messenger, Martini. The messenger is already gone. So, be quick may have a reference to wherever you are, get out of there now, pick up the packs and move!
I agree with Fox that it's a consolidation maneuver rather than anything else. Packs do not mean ammunition. If Custer wanted ammunition and all the ammunition, then good-bye pack train and good-bye Reno. That's the idea, that now I'm going to consolidate my position with all the 24,000 spare rounds of the regiment in my hands with the eight companies and the rest of you can go hang. That's in effect what you are saying if you believe that concept; to bring all the spare ammunition to Custer. Benteen (three companies), Custer (five companies); the rest of the companies can whistle for it. Because, I'm going to be in a tough situation and I'm going to survive; the rest of you may die but that's life in the frontier army.
Doesn't make sense and I don't think Custer made that kind of decision. He would not even have had the information to make that decision at the time the message was sent!
These guys didn't know they were heading for disaster. The first time Benteen knew there was a disaster was when he saw Reno. The other information Benteen was getting from Kanipe and Martin was, "Hey boys, we got them." Custer is charging the village, killing them left and right! Maybe these guys are not the smartest people in the world but the information coming back from the front is favorable and Benteen figures he won't get there to burn a tipi.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Warmest Regards,
Bob
www.vonsworks.com
www.friendslittlebighorn.com
www.friendsnezpercebattlefields.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited by - bhist on May 28 2004 04:33:31 AM
So Joe when did you first know the name Pohanka and the connection to the LBH?
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
  |
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 28 2009 : 7:39:50 PM
|
In 2004, I did not know that your message board existed. The AAO's board was my first and, only attempt to post. In fact, my newness at posting was exemplified by my stupidly in using my real name to do so. This left me wide open to a specific jerk who relished saying things like "Wiggs the Liar." It is one thing to be called, publicly, "Pumpkin Head the Liar, Bloody Nose the Liar, or even Moppet Head the Liar. It is quite another thing to have your father's name attacked by a obnoxious cretin.
I purchased a paper back edition of Graham's "Custer Myths" which had an introduction by "Pohanka." I had no idea that this gentleman was know to your forum and had recently passed away.
Despite your personal opinion of me, I would never had used his name had I known these facts. That is why I immediately left the forum after that and, despite what you think, have never returned.
The AAO's forum is my home. Benteen is now posting phenomenal threads and, I am learning so much from him. You see az, you are never to learn to open your ears and learn. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 29 2009 : 10:23:12 AM
|
[quote]Originally posted by joe wiggs
In 2004, I did not know that your message board existed. The AAO's board was my first and, only attempt to post. In fact, my newness at posting was exemplified by my stupidly in using my real name to do so. This left me wide open to a specific jerk who relished saying things like "Wiggs the Liar." It is one thing to be called, publicly, "Pumpkin Head the Liar, Bloody Nose the Liar, or even Moppet Head the Liar. It is quite another thing to have your father's name attacked by a obnoxious cretin.
I purchased a paper back edition of Graham's "Custer Myths" which had an introduction by "Pohanka." I had no idea that this gentleman was know to your forum and had recently passed away.
Despite your personal opinion of me, I would never had used his name had I known these facts. That is why I immediately left the forum after that and, despite what you think, have never returned.
The AAO's forum is my home. Benteen is now posting phenomenal threads and, I am learning so much from him. You see az, you are never to learn to open your ears and learn.
[/quote]Joe you started the thread Benteen's Orders in 2004. The post of bhist is on that thread. He uses the name Pohanka on the AAO board thread that you started. Follow the link below and you can see that you post on that same page.
http://www.mohicanpress.com/messageboard2/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=145&whichpage=8
Joe you again lie or mislead, your choice. I do not have a message board and first engaged posting as AZ Ranger on this board. Anyone let alone a crack retired police officer can check the members list and see that AZ Ranger has an earlier start date on AAO than any other board.
So Joe your comment "In fact, my newness at posting was exemplified by my stupidly in using my real name to do so. This left me wide open to a specific jerk who relished saying things like "Wiggs the Liar." tells us what about you?
You started as Joesph Wiggs and now you are Joe Wiggs how does that change your quote from above "Wiggs the Liar."
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 29 2009 10:24:31 AM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 29 2009 : 7:17:21 PM
|
My bad. You are obsessed with what you wish to believe therefore, anything that contradicts that belief is wrong. I promise you this, I will never bore you again with honesty; you just don't want it.
Post your belief and perspectives without insults and I will endeavor to do likewise.
|
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 30 2009 : 09:36:04 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
My bad. You are obsessed with what you wish to believe therefore, anything that contradicts that belief is wrong. I promise you this, I will never bore you again with honesty; you just don't want it.
Post your belief and perspectives without insults and I will endeavor to do likewise.
Honesty would be refreshing. My comments are based upon your posts. How can state that you were not exposed to the name Pohanka on this board? Then your state something about using your real name Joseph Wiggs as a mistake and yet you signed on again as Joe Wiggs which is still your real name.
I have no problem with discussing theories etc. but will challenge what I believe to be false statements and the portraying of false testimonies. What I believe happens is that the challenge is effective and you must make personal comments requiring further personal posts. If you are going to state something about Rosser opinion than it should not be contradicted by Rosser's own writing.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 05 2009 : 9:33:59 PM
|
I know this is a waste of time yet, still I go on. When I initially started posting I used my actual name. Do you know of anyone else who has done that? of course not! Now you may call me stupid for doing so because I was. After doing so for almost 6 years, what did you expect me to call myself, Ricky Ricardo? I was know on this forum for six years as Joseph Wiggs. Can't you even understand this one simple point?
After awhile, my computer became so infested with viruses that I had to have it repaired. When that was accomplished, I attempted to re-enter on to the forum but, it would not accept my name;it stated a Joseph Wiggs was already a member. Thus, I came back on as Joe Wiggs which was accepted.
Why I'm explaining this to you is an incredible waste of time for if you were as interested in the truth as you are slandering me this issue would not be a major point. The rest of the world does not seem to be as consumed with my nomenclature, honesty, nor untruthfulness; only the duo of dc and az.
Rosser's opinions and writings were the same as far as I know. Could you please post an example of the differences between the two? |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 05 2009 : 9:37:16 PM
|
I know this is a waste of time yet, still I go on. When I initially started posting I used my actual name. Do you know of anyone else who has done that? of course not! Now you may call me stupid for doing so because I was. After doing so for almost 6 years, what did you expect me to call myself, Ricky Ricardo? I was know on this forum for six years as Joseph Wiggs. Can't you even understand this one simple point?
After awhile, my computer became so infested with viruses that I had to have it repaired. When that was accomplished, I attempted to re-enter on to the forum but, it would not accept my name;it stated a Joseph Wiggs was already a member. Thus, I came back on as Joe Wiggs which was accepted.
Why I'm explaining this to you is an incredible waste of time for if you were as interested in the truth as you are slandering me this issue would not be a major point. The rest of the world does not seem to be as consumed with my nomenclature, honesty, nor untruthfulness; only the duo of dc and az.
Rosser's opinions and writings were the same as far as I know. Could you please post an example of the differences between the two?
Here's another hint. if you wish to continue corresponding on the forum cease calling members "liars." It is an unnecessary insult that does not produce goodwill nor does it facilitate the open exchange of information. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 07 2009 : 08:36:58 AM
|
Joe unless you have not looked at the members section then you should have known from the start I have made my real name available also.
Rosser's letters are available in Custer's Myth and you can read the change from his first letter to the second. He freely admits that he does not know all the facts in the first letter so his assumptions that he changed in his second letter were based upon further evidence being revealed are obvious. He is a friend of Custer and I would expect nothing different from him.
The difference is that Rosser assumes that a Custer Plan would include a location if repulsed to meet so the regiment could get back together. Rosser also did not know that Reno was the advance and Custer had the main body.
So following Rosser's first letter, where could a location be that the whole regiment could be reunited? Certainly not the valley or the timber since the location requires that the battalion be repulsed to begin with and neither the skirmish line or the timber indicate being repulsed as opposed to going on the defense and bringing the Indians to battle. It would have to be located on the bluffs where Reno went to when repulsed, I would think using Rosser's first beliefs. Secondly Rosser appears to assume that Custer was the advance and Reno had the main body and 7 companies to support. In fact Reno had 3 companies and Custer was in control of the main body which includes the 5 companies, the pack train and the rear guard.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
cutter
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - April 30 2010 : 12:52:36 AM
|
| haughtiness as stopped the flow of discourse here. |
They who govern best, govern least. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - April 30 2010 : 09:06:29 AM
|
cutter
Actually Rich stopped the original "Benteen's Orders". Joe Wiggs started a second one to cover up his false statements made in the first one. The problem is that he can't help himself and continues in his new posts.
I think there has been a lot of good discussion here and over time there is less to discuss regarding Benteen's orders.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - April 30 2010 : 7:32:17 PM
|
This has been and, will always continue to be the problem with this forum; you and your ilk choose to defame and accuse others of impropriety who disgree with you. As long as your kind are allowed to continue to post, conversation will be hampered and cease to be. I warned you of this but,you refused to listen. As Cutter so wisely stated, "Haughtiness has stopped the flow of discourse here."
Any of you who may be interested in beginning anew by excluding who argue rarther than discourse please feel free to PM me. |
Edited by - joe wiggs on April 30 2010 7:33:13 PM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 01 2010 : 01:38:54 AM
|
Yes, you can PM Wiggs to enter that fascinating Wiggs World of Wonderment where his opinions and methods of expression take your breath away, which must be the reason his posts can stay up, unanswered or visited, for months. Everybody is obviously near faint with the gift before them.
But if your time isn't worth nothing, and you'd like to find amusement here, pop some corn (light butter, no salt) grab a cold diet Coke and read the original Benteen's Orders thread. There you'll find Wiggs caught in lies, not knowing or understanding what people have said in clear English, not knowing or understanding what he has said in near English (although in fairness sometimes that's because he's just copying someone else's work he thinks elevated in tone and beyond his abilities), misquoting if not fabricating quotes out of the air, and being nailed by several posters, me among them but others doing a better and more enjoyable job. A world of entertainment. Funnier than the Hangover, really.
Wiggs has been caught here and on other forums using several, perhaps many User ID's, so for all I know cutter is yet another. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on May 01 2010 01:40:37 AM |
|
|
|
cutter
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 06 2010 : 8:42:32 PM
|
| Well, I know Joe Wiggs, he's a friend of mine, and I'm no Joe Wiggs. Sorry I butted my nose into this thing. |
They who govern best, govern least. |
|
|
|
cutter
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 11 2010 : 01:05:44 AM
|
| It's funny how it all works out,experienced haughtiness stopped Custer too. |
They who govern best, govern least. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 13 2010 : 10:18:46 AM
|
| So your purpose is to defend Joe? |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
cutter
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 18 2010 : 5:39:23 PM
|
| Naw AZ, Joe can take care of himself. Just setting the record strait on who's who. |
They who govern best, govern least. |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - May 20 2010 : 1:46:04 PM
|
Herein lies the personality fault/quirk of az, his inexplicable rationale and insistance that it is his god given right to judge others. Cutter, ever a gentleman, is quite correct. I can take care of myself. Yet, az pointedly questions this gentleman about his motive(s) which are persoable to himself unless he wishes to share it.
Az you have neither the authority nor qualifications to contiuously "judge" anyone on this or any other forum,your insistance on doing so only stands to make you appear smaller and more insinificant to the rest of us when you do so while forcing others to leave; a feat you and dc combined so inchantedly to destroy this forum.
Yet still you go on in a tirade of joe wiggs, joe wiggs, joe Wiggs. I have never understood you and dc's fixaction with me. Do you both not realize that even your friends wish you would go on to a different topic. To blame me for everything that goes ill with the world is not only moronic its rediculous. Please, the both of you-get a life. 
|
|
|
|
cutter
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 20 2010 : 11:57:09 PM
|
| Well, all being said here, I think it shows disrespect to the men who died at LBH. Joe's my friend, I have no beef with AZ, dc, well, I'm sure he's heard it before. Let's remember why we're here. |
They who govern best, govern least. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 21 2010 : 11:52:59 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by cutter
Well, all being said here, I think it shows disrespect to the men who died at LBH. Joe's my friend, I have no beef with AZ, dc, well, I'm sure he's heard it before. Let's remember why we're here.
That has been my point with Joe all along that he disrespects troopers and officers without proof. When you start a thread "Why did Wallace lie" it is assumed that he lied and we only need to discuss the motive. He defames Wallace then when asked to provide proof he fails to provide. You can discuss it without defaming the person and then draw your own conclusions with what is presented.
That seems to me be a better approach. If Joe wants to start a thread "Why did Wallace Lie" then I will ask him to prove he lied.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 21 2010 : 11:57:17 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
Herein lies the personality fault/quirk of az, his inexplicable rationale and insistance that it is his god given right to judge others. Cutter, ever a gentleman, is quite correct. I can take care of myself. Yet, az pointedly questions this gentleman about his motive(s) which are persoable to himself unless he wishes to share it.
Az you have neither the authority nor qualifications to contiuously "judge" anyone on this or any other forum,your insistance on doing so only stands to make you appear smaller and more insinificant to the rest of us when you do so while forcing others to leave; a feat you and dc combined so inchantedly to destroy this forum.
Yet still you go on in a tirade of joe wiggs, joe wiggs, joe Wiggs. I have never understood you and dc's fixaction with me. Do you both not realize that even your friends wish you would go on to a different topic. To blame me for everything that goes ill with the world is not only moronic its rediculous. Please, the both of you-get a life.
jOE it seems a little judgemental to me. Since you also don't advocate that in your above post your position is unclear. If you want past judgments you have made there are many.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on May 21 2010 11:58:18 AM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 21 2010 : 4:29:42 PM
|
Cutter,
I have found that when one peruses the actions of individual officers/men who were involved in this battle you are perceived as a contemptible worm who cravenly insults the dearly departed. I understand this as the subject is extremely delicate and sensitive, unless you blame Custer!
However, the truh can not be discerned until the actions of all involved parties are placed under a microscope and thoroughly examined. There are those who will hauntingly say, "the truth can never be known and it is futile to insist upon it." To those person(s) I ask, Why are you here?
I'd be very interested to read your opinion about this Cutter. |
Edited by - joe wiggs on May 21 2010 4:31:05 PM |
|
|
|
cutter
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 22 2010 : 2:33:55 PM
|
Seems to me that all the information concerning the battle has been picked over as much as the
battlefield itself. The amount of new details are few, and so there is a finite amount of material to work with.
So in order to reveal something new, that might shed new light on what happened that day, one
has to dig deeper, and inspect more in detail everything all over again. All information should be
used, from all participants, from what ever source, not unlike a jigsaw puzzle.
This is where established theories may hurt more then help. A person gets it in his head that this
or that happened in a certain way, and any other theory is vulgar poppycock, case closed. It
closes avenues of discussion, and research. That doesn't do anyone any good except the author
of the theory.
I've always thought the idea that if Custer himself came back to life and said what really happened at LBH, half the experts would disagree flat out, established theory being what it is.
So, since one guess is as good as another, it depends on how educated the guess is that wins the
day.
My only problem with the Wallace thread is the wording, I do think it could have been more
diplomatic, other then that, all is fair game. |
They who govern best, govern least. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - May 23 2010 : 11:33:53 AM
|
My only problem with the Wallace thread is the wording, I do think it could have been more diplomatic, other then that, all is fair game.
That is exactly the point Cutter. One should start at a neutral positon,not smearing an officer's name without proof, in an investigation when trying to figure out what happened. Don't start with an assumption that Wallace lied since that leaves out the alternatives that he did not lie and was correct or did not lie and made an error in recording the time. When you start with a lie the only thing that leads to is why. It always leads to a conspiracy to cover up.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on May 23 2010 11:35:39 AM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Benteen's Orders
