And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: (Yes, thank you Mary for providing the link to the previous article. Also, a note..the URL at the end is not functioning check the index at http://www.dickshovel.com/ for an accurate URL for the Washita Massacre and related links, thanks..Ish) From: David Rider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Thanks for posting this, Mary. I'd be interested in your take on the article, and anyone else's who has read it. After all that's been written about this battle, they still don't know what really happened and how it really happened. Mainly because most of those who write about it still won't talk to or take the Indian side of the story seriously. The article says there were some 2000 "warriors" going up against Custer. Vine Deloria says if there were that many men in the village, imagine the number of women and children and old folks, and it would have been so crowded they'd all smother each other. Historians like to inflate the number of Indians when it serves white interests (Custer was overwhelmed; what could the poor boy do?). Just as they like to deflate Indian numbers when that's in white interests (there were only a million here in the first place, so that's not such a big holocaust after all). The article claims that Custer's poor judgment and tactics were the result of his lack of sleep (30 hours without a nap) and lack of food (he was cranky and thoughtless coz he needed a peanut butter sandwich or something). I've read that line of reasoning elsewhere; some historians give credence to it. I don't. Custer endured much worse hardship in Civil War battles and his "judgment" was hailed as brilliant, although a bit wreckless. Regardless, it just seems to me that the author of this article is looking for a way to explain how a white army - presumed superior in every regard - could have been routed by Indians. The only answer that occurs to the author - and many historians - is of overwhelming force against whites who were suffering hardship. An alternate explanation: Custer and other Army officers, George Crook and Lt. Reno included, assumed the same things the author of this article assumes. They were white, they were superior, Indians will see them and run for their lives. It will be another massacre just like the Army was so accustomed to inflicting on sleepy Indian villages. They ignored their own scouts, Crows, who told them very clearly what they were in for, and who were so certain they would all die if they followed Custer's plan, they "dressed" for death before going in. And go in they did: They charged into the Little Bighorn and met some of the toughest, smartest, most determined humans on the planet, who kicked some butt and then went home. A brief quote from the article: "Standing virtually alone, on a dark and cold and moody late afternoon, a vision flirts before my eyes, off in the distance, down there in the valley, of an immense Indian village filled with exultant warriors celebrating a great victory. A haunting place." I've been there myself. The only thing even remotely "haunting" about it was the thought that after the battle, that "immense Indian village" would be dispersed and starved off their homeland and the stragglers would be herded into reservations like prisoners into concentration camps. Some of the alleged "leaders" would be shipped all the way to Fort Marion in Florida for brainwashing by the head Commandant in charge there, Pratt, who would later go on to head up Carlisle Boarding School and employ virtually the same tactics against children...*That* is haunting. dave Reprinted under the fair use http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html doctrine of international copyright law. &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit) Unenh onhwa' Awayaton http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/ &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
