|
Post by Banned on Apr 10, 2007 10:33:35 GMT -6
Frank, have a look at my reply #19. I think that Michno's summary is fair, but it leans towards the military accounts. Note that he only says that Custer "reported 103 indians killed"; not that he (Michno) endorses the figure. My only quibbles with his summary are that Elliott only took 17 men with him and that it has not been proved that the Cheyennes (or indeed any Indians) killed the two captives. Gary Nonsense. Who scalped Clara Blinn? Mickey Mouse ? Lee Harvey Oswald?
|
|
|
Post by gary on Apr 10, 2007 10:36:25 GMT -6
Who scalped Black Kettle?
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Apr 10, 2007 10:39:08 GMT -6
;D ;D Helpful employees yelling: "Next please..." ;D ;D Of course, we are talking the federal government ... next best thing to the old Soviet bureaucracy. Jobs for life! --t.
|
|
|
Post by Banned on Apr 10, 2007 10:54:22 GMT -6
Black Kettle was always seen as a peace chief, except by those who coveted the Cheyenne territory. And who wrote the reports that Black Kettle was peaceful? The same people who said that the Indians were not at war when Kansas was burning to the ground. Black Kettle himself admitted the crimes on October 20 1868 to Colonel Hazen. Before him, Little Rock admitted that "MOST OF OUR YOUNG MEN" were involved in the massacres Custerstands, you say that over 100 warriors were killed and then increase the figure to 120. This figure is just not possible. Leaving aside Richard Hardorff's book, you will see from Jerome Greene's that there were 51 lodges housing 250 people in Black Kettle's village (I do not believe that the number of lodges, which is also given by Hoig, is questioned by any commentator). This latter figure is of course based upon the ratio of six people per lodge. It was usually estimated that there would be one or two warriors per lodge. There could be 3 warriors in a lodge (12 years and older is a warrior) Remember that 11 warchiefs were killed during the battle, ELEVEN. ELEVEN. ELEVEN (Black Kettle and Little Rock not included) Morrison was Wynkoop's gangster, his numbers mean nothing. Black Kettle had so much blood on his hands that he even couldn't deny the charges when Hazen asked him about the massacres. He just said that his young men were massacring settlers but (same tone all over again) he had no control on them. Little Rock didn't die heroically, he died protecting a village full of criminal after having try to protect abusers of white women and gangsters. Little Rock was not candid while telling without any shame that his own warriors were raping women in Kansas (Miss Blinn, Miss Bassett, Miss Shaw and so on...) By the same token, Black Kettle also made it clear that he wanted peace. In 2004, Bin Laden wanted peace with America. I am sure he deserves the Nobel prize too... The fact is that Custer attacked a predominantly peaceful village. It may have contained a few warriors who had been involved in the recent depredations, but the majority of the village was innocent. This one is funny. 4 white scalps were found, with so much material (for 400 $!) that it was just obcene to pretend that the village was peaceful. Clara Blinn was peacefully murdered and scalped, and her son peacefull thrown against a tree and scalped, after being starved to death by the peaceful Cheyennes. Little Rock's and Black Kettle's warriors were also peacefully massacring half of the Kansas, peacefully raping Miss Bassette, peacefully raping Miss Shaw, peacefully murdering Bordagus, Mister Shaw, Aaron Bell, peacefully kidnapping the Bell twins and many, many other children... If Black Kettle was peaceful, then Zarqawi was peaceful too. Peacefully doing their job. Indeed, if you analyse what Little Rock said, you will see that the majority involved in the depredations actually went unpunished. To that extent, the attack was not only a travesty, but it failed to target those that Custer allegedly wanted to punish. No, they targeted the right village, but the Indian Ring and all Black Kettle's buffs did their best to convince people that the village was, in fact, a peace-loving camping. It was just lies, and Wynkoop was not the first involved in this kind of lies. Months after these lies, "peace agents" said to Sheridan that Satanta, the butcher of Texas, was in fact a good man! What a joke! As far as;soldiers protecting civilians and avoiding their killing; is concerned, this is simply not supported by the evidence. Soldiers were killing women and children. Ben Clarke reported this to Custer and asked him if it was his wish that these people should be killed;. It was only then that Custer told Clarke to quot;give his compliments; to the officer in charge and ask him to stop it. It's the only story talking about soldiers shooting on civilians ! Custer did the right thing by saying stop - it's collateral damage. But you are avoiding every other story, the one that said that Sergeant-Major Kennedy was escorting (ESCORTING) civilians to the rear, the one that said that Barnitz was ESCORTING dozens of women in the rear, the one that said that soldiers screamed to the women to lie on the ground when the battle started to avoid their death... Benteen's letters are full of anti-Custer propaganda. Benteen hates everyone. Every one of his statement is full of lies. Clara Blinn and her son were murdered by the Cheyennes, the Kansas soldiers found them near the location of Black Kettle's body. Of course, Wynkoop's gang tried afterwards to put their death on Custer's back, but it was an other of their lies. Do you know that the Indian Ring, Wynkoop and others, even try to convince people that Black Kettle had fought with the Union during the Civil War? What a joke.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Apr 10, 2007 10:55:44 GMT -6
Jesse Leavenworth and Albert Boone, agents for the Comanches and Kiowas, reported that their enquiries indicated that the troops had killed the Blinns. Their involvement resulted from the fact that Custer and Sheridan blamed the Kiowas or the Arapahho, not the Cheyennes, for killing them.
There was a very good analysis of the the deaths of Clara and Willie Blinn by Joe Haines in the Summer 1999 volume of Chronicles of Oklahoma. After sifting through the evidence, Haines concluded that "[t]he most believable scenario has Clara and Willie Blinn in Black Kettle's village at the time of Custer's attack. As they attempted to fleefrom the village, they were pursued and killed by one of Custer's men".
He also comments that the fact that Clara was scalped "settles nothing in trying to discover her killer".
Gary
|
|
Frank
Full Member
Posts: 226
|
Post by Frank on Apr 10, 2007 10:56:49 GMT -6
;D ;D Helpful employees yelling: "Next please..." ;D ;D ... next best thing to the old Soviet bureaucracy. Jobs for life! --t. Here in Finland we have a saying about communism and its translated about like this I think: "Communism: Everything that is yours is also mine and everything that is mine, you dont touch!";D
|
|
|
Post by Banned on Apr 10, 2007 10:58:50 GMT -6
Jesse Leavenworth and Albert Boone, agents for the Comanches and Kiowas, reported that their enquiries indicated that the troops had killed the Blinns.
Refresh my memory: they are the same men who said that Black Kettle was peaceful and that even Satanta was peaceful too? What a joke.
Who made Willie Blinn starving to death (result of Dr. Lippincott's autopsy)? Custer? Lee Harvey Oswald?
|
|
|
Post by Banned on Apr 10, 2007 11:02:11 GMT -6
There was a very good analysis of the the deaths of Clara and Willie Blinn by Joe Haines in the Summer 1999 volume of Chronicles of Oklahoma. After sifting through the evidence, Haines concluded that "[t]he most believable scenario has Clara and Willie Blinn in Black Kettle's village at the time of Custer's attack. As they attempted to fleefrom the village, they were pursued and killed by one of Custer's men".
Based on what? On Cheyennes today who said that E.T. killed the people in Kansas? E.T. killed Clara Blinn, because she was found scalped with a revolver bullet in her neck (CLOSE-RANGE KILLING, like the EXECUTION of a PRISONER BY HER CAPTORS). Her son was thrown against a tree, again, it's an execution.
Both bodies laid a few meters from the location of Black Kettle's body.
|
|
|
Post by Banned on Apr 10, 2007 11:04:55 GMT -6
Here is Gregory Michno's article on Black Kettle www.historynet.com/culture/wild_west/3418666.htmlAlthough usually portrayed as a man of peace, Cheyenne Chief Black Kettle may have been an ineffective leader at best. By Gregory Michno Here is the Washita part: After all the efforts of both sides, the treaty lasted only until the spring of 1868. Both chiefs and young warriors ignored the agreement that stated they would stop killing and taking hostages. A Cheyenne foray that began as an attack against the Kaws near Council Grove, Kan., degenerated into attacks against settlers, culminating in robbery, rape, destroyed property and stolen stock. When the government withheld annuities because of the broken treaty, about 200 Cheyennes, with Lakota allies, went on a destructive raid in north-central Kansas. When it was over, 40 settlers had been killed or wounded, at least four women were raped, and one woman and two children were captured. Some of the raiders came from Black Kettle's camp. As was the case on numerous previous occasions, his village was open to terrorists. When the raiders returned, Black Kettle made a run south of the Arkansas River. General Sheridan promised Kansas Governor Samuel Crawford that he would remove the hostile Indians from his state. The raiding continued for three more months and resulted in a winter campaign that led to the Battle of the Washita. Even George Bent, a mixed-blood white-Cheyenne, admitted that the raids were a bad mistake, and believed the Indians were at fault. In October 1868, Cheyennes attacked a wagon train along the Arkansas River in eastern Colorado Territory and captured Clara Blinn and her little boy Willie. The raiders took their captives to Black Kettle's camp on the Washita River. The Indians believed they had good bargaining chips with which to deal for peace, much as they had attempted to do with their captives in the late summer of 1864. Blinn wrote a letter pleading for someone to rescue them, and it reached Colonel William B. Hazen, in charge at Fort Cobb. On November 20, Black Kettle, Big Mouth and a number of chiefs representing the Cheyennes and Arapahos, came to see Hazen to discuss peace and talk about ransoming the white captives. Since these tribes were currently at war with the United States, Hazen, unlike Major Wynkoop in 1864, knew he could not make a separate peace with them. Although Black Kettle was ostensibly at Fort Cobb to discuss peace, he did say, as Hazen recorded it, "that many of his men were then on the war path, and that their people did not want peace with the people above the Arkansas." Hazen directed them to go back to their villages and deal directly with General Sheridan. It was too late. Lieutenant Colonel George A. Custer and the 7th Cavalry were already in Indian Territory hunting the Cheyennes. Once again, marauding warriors headed for sanctuary in Black Kettle's village. Custer followed their tracks right into it. He did not know about the white captives in the village, nor did he know whose village it was that his cavalry struck at the icy cold dawn of November 27, 1868. As the troopers splashed across the Washita, chaos erupted and gunfire reverberated in the frigid air. Some Indians fought, but most of them scattered. Custer captured the camp, burned the tepees and reported killing 103 Indians and capturing 53, with a loss of 21 soldiers killed and 16 wounded. The Cheyennes killed Clara and Willie Blinn. Clara was shot above the left eyebrow, and scalped. Black Kettle and his wife mounted a pony and fled. Bullets from the cavalrymen struck them as they crossed the river. Black Kettle was hit in the stomach, but he kept riding. Another bullet hit him in the back, and he fell into the icy water, the first Indian killed that day. His wife was killed moments later. The soldiers rode over them as they charged into the village. Thus ended the life of Black Kettle. His traditional portrayal as an honest, strong-willed man, an effective leader and a visionary do not all stand up to the evidenc
|
|
|
Post by gary on Apr 10, 2007 11:06:32 GMT -6
Custerstands, you say that four white scalps were found.
There is no evidence to support this. To the best of my knowledge, it is based upon an unsubstantiated claim by Sheridan. I do not recall that it was in Custer's report.
Even if the scalps were found, they do not prove that the whole village was hostile.
Indeed, they would not even prove that the person in possession of the scalps was responsible for taking them.
The claim that four white scalps were found and that the Blinns were killed by the Cheyennes was nothing more than propaganda. As was the claim (which was quickly discounted) that one of the women had disembowelled a white baby before being shot by the troops. In fact, in desperation, this woman was killing herself and her own baby and was (according to Ben Clark) needlessly shot.
How can the killing of the women and children be justified?
How about Pilan, the mexican trader who was in the village at the time of the attack. He surrendered to the troops and was then murdered. In fact, he was treated very similarly to Jack Smith, John Simpson Smith's mixed race son, who was murdered at Sand Creek.
Gary
|
|
Frank
Full Member
Posts: 226
|
Post by Frank on Apr 10, 2007 11:13:21 GMT -6
Nice video on you tube custerstands, did you make it? And is that custerwest.org your website? I did spend like last 2 hours in there
|
|
|
Post by Banned on Apr 10, 2007 11:21:32 GMT -6
Custerstands, you say that four white scalps were found. There is no evidence to support this. To the best of my knowledge, it is based upon an unsubstantiated claim by Sheridan. I do not recall that it was in Custer's report. Even if the scalps were found, they do not prove that the whole village was hostile. Indeed, they would not even prove that the person in possession of the scalps was responsible for taking them. The claim that four white scalps were found and that the Blinns were killed by the Cheyennes was nothing more than propaganda. As was the claim (which was quickly discounted) that one of the women had disembowelled a white baby before being shot by the troops. In fact, in desperation, this woman was killing herself and her own baby and was (according to Ben Clark) needlessly shot. How can the killing of the women and children be justified? How about Pilan, the mexican trader who was in the village at the time of the attack. He surrendered to the troops and was then murdered. In fact, he was treated very similarly to Jack Smith, John Simpson Smith's mixed race son, who was murdered at Sand Creek. Gary Pilan (White Bear) was at best a Mexican doing business with criminals, at worst a prostitute hunter who wanted to put Clara Blinn and her son into slavery in Mexico (Clara Blinn was affraid of being sold by the Cheyennes, because the peaceful warriors said to her that they wanted to sell her and her son to the Mexicans, what a peaceful band is that!) Justice is : if you cover a criminal, you are guilty of complicity. Hazen asked Black Kettle to send to him all the criminals. Black Kettle said that he would never do that. Little Rock said the same. Ok... Enjoy the consequences. Ben Clark said that the white boy was a white Indian. Perhaps. One thing that is sure, is that Willie Blinn WAS a white boy, and that the Cheyennes (civilians or warriors) who throw him against a tree after having starved him to death knew what atrocity means. The killing of women and children CANNOT be justified, but in the course of action, soldiers shot some of them. If the warriors had enough guts to stay near the burnt farms in Kansas, their families would be safe at home because the army would kill the warriors on open field. But the terrorists are not courageous, and they fled into their village, hoping that the women and children could save them from punishment. Custer did his best to prevent the killing of women and children, and issued orders, but if women and children were killed, it's not his fault, nor the fault of the entire regiment. Everything they could do was done. It's the Cheyenne entire fault. They were hidden in their village. The day BEFORE the attack, some warriors even came back from Kansas, when they had murdered 4 white men. By the way, if the killing of women and children cannot be justified, what about the EXECUTION of Clara Blinn and her son ? What about the kidnapping of two more white boys whose were released by Custer? What about Willie Blinn being put in starvation by the Cheyennes while being captured (and perhaps even abused, we know that Cheyennes did the worst things ever to their prisoners, civilians or not)?
|
|
|
Post by Banned on Apr 10, 2007 11:22:13 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by gary on Apr 10, 2007 11:25:07 GMT -6
Custerstands, there are numerous errors in your post #48 above. I do not intend to repeat myself by correcting them however.
I have enjoyed Greg Michno's books, but I do not always agree wholeheartedly with his conclusions. Our interest in this subject would however be very dreary if all of the writers simply agreed with each other and repeated the same old cant.
Although I may prefer to accept Stan Hoig's assessment of Black Kettle to Greg Michno's, Michno's article certainly provides food for thought and is all the better for it. I have just ordered Greg's latest book and may well take issue with some of his propositions, but I am still confident that it will be worth reading.
There are always two sides to every account. Custer after all was not a bloodthirsty muderer. He was simply the product of his times and I am sure that the majority of the military did not criticise his conduct at the Washita (except in relation to Elliott). By the same token, I suspect that many shared Benteen's view that it was not a particularly glorious victory.
Similarly, Black Kettle had his faults. But he was also a man of his times and simply did not have the control over all of the Cheyenne warriors to enable him to stop all of the raiding. This does not mean that murdering him (an old man of over 70) was justified. It also does not detract from the fact that all of those who actually encountered him believed that he wanted peace.
The causes of the fighting between the Cheyennes and the army were varied. It is however probably fair to say that if the Cheyenne lands had not been encroached upon, there would have been a lot less violence.
Gary
|
|
|
Post by Banned on Apr 10, 2007 11:40:45 GMT -6
Gary, I really appreciate your openess (is that the word?) to the subject.
On my side, I am really ready to discuss the matter of Black Kettle's guilt. But I won't discuss the reality of the crimes of the Cheyennes in 1868, because it would be rewriting history. Their crimes are undeniable - and are far higher that we often think. The degree of violence against the Solomon settlements is outstanding. The Bell twins were even forced by the Cheyennes to watch their mother being raped by warriors.
What is certain, is that Black Kettle's warriors were involved in these crimes, and that they fled away in their village where the news came that the army was coming. They broke the 1867 treaty and waited for the consequences. Black Kettle was sent to Hazen not to protest for his innocence, but to almost make a diversion, a cover-up of the entire scene.
No surprise, when Black Kettle came back in his village, he decided with his eleven (ELEVEN) warchief to move away, hoping that the army would miss him.
Hazen wrote in his report that the Cheyennes were hoping support from the Dog Soldiers who had to come south in the spring. Again, it's a declaration of war.
|
|