Oh! How They Lied!

[joewiggs]

"In the blame-laying aftermath of the Little Bighorn fight, Captain Robert P. Hughes (Terry's brother-in-law and aide-de-camp) and Major James Brisbin (second Cavalry) attempted to show that Custer had disobeyed explicit orders, but their efforts were exposed after the discovery that the copy of Terry's instructions they were using had been deliberately altered. In attempting to spare Terry any blame in the affair, they served the good general and his memory poorly."

To Hell with Honor, Page 77

[joewiggs]

Much was written about Custer's failure to scout the area of Tullock's Creek were, supposedly, the Indians were located. His failure to do was cited, by his accusers, as an example of Custer's eagerness to attack and, distance himself from support so as to gain all the glory of battle for himself. Terry's brother-in-law, Hughes, used the following to slam Custer, a letter from Varnum to Hughes twenty years after the battle:

"in all his instructions from General Custer in regard to scouting he never heard of Tullock's creek...and any examination whatever was made of the Tullock Valley, it was made without his knowledge and by someone not under his control."

Fred Dustin, an early Custer student who saw no good in anything Custer did, used this late recollection by Varnum to bolster his case for Custer's disregard of Terry's orders.

Both men failed to follow up this inquiry by asking if any other precautions had been taken by (Custer) to look for and recover vital clues as to the whereabouts of the village. If they had, they would have learned that a large, well defined and "hot" Indian trail had by passed Tullock Valley, hence, the non-necessity to go there.

But why confuse allegations with facts?
".

[whitebull]

When you are looking for the truth, anyway you can find it, you can sure get turned around sometime by so called testimony.

Heres an example, I recall Moylan taking credit -at the Reno inquiry-for making sure his men were alright during the run to the hill. He kind of gave the impression that he was real "cool" under fire.

Now See Below:\\Page 318, To Hell with Honor.

John Burkman," Moylan was called "Aparejo Mickie" because he never left the protection of the packs guardinging his "A" troop position."

Did anyone else beside Burkman see Moylan shaking?

[joewiggs]

WB, here's another tidbit of "why weren't questions asked by the Inquiry Board" also from "To Hell W/Honor"

Addresses a paradox of testimony that can only be explained when the observer addresses this critical absence of "questioning" by the board members.

"Wallace told a number of lies, but when he told the court that he was always in close proximity to Reno (and was therefore able to corroborate Reno's version of events), he told a whopper. Whatever Recorder lee thought he had learned in the pre-inquiry questioning of Wallace, he must have been shocked by what he heard now!

Also, the following must be asked: Why is it that no member of the Board (with all their combined knowledge of Command structure) did not wonder why Wallace would be with Reno when his responsibility as Custer's Engineering Officer -charged with keeping the itinerary of the march, among other responsibilities, was not with the Headquarters Staff as required?

The question was not asked by the Board for a specific reason, the script had been written before the Inquiry and they were merely following orders.

[whitebull]

Answer me this! What and who can we trust!?

[joewiggs]

Read every book you can find on the subject, read the forum, share the information with as many as you may then make a decision about whay may be the truth based on ratioanl and logical circumstances!

[whitebull]

Aug 1, 2013 12:35:53 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

Read every book you can find on the subject, read the forum, share the information with as many as you may then make a decision about what may be the truth based on rational and logical circumstances!

You are so right about this partner. I guess on the other forums too because I don't get enough time to read as much as I would like. it seems to me that you can almost find enough evidence to back up any theory you choose. The trick is to not get into a shoot out with the dude or dudette who disagrees with you. ;D

I've been passing through Grey,s book but the neighborhood is just a little bit high class for me. If you can get by all of them time lines and such you can find some interesting stuff.

One point he makes is that Custer really believed that the village was on the run by being warned by Indian scouts not to far from "Lone Tepee." That being the case, it seems to me that Custer had to get at 'em least they get away.

Now does that make him a glory hunter or a man just doing his job? I guess it depends on what book you read!