Wounded Knee Massacre - December 29, 1890

[1srelluc]

https://dakotabroadcasting.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Wounded-Knee.jpg

December 28, 2024

On the clear, cold morning of December 29, 1890, on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, three U.S.

heathercoxrichardson.substack.com

On the clear, cold morning of December 29, 1890, on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, three U.S. soldiers tried to wrench a valuable Winchester away from a young Lakota man. He refused to give up his hunting weapon. It was the only thing standing between his family and starvation, and he had no faith it would be returned to him as the officer promised: he had watched as soldiers had marked other confiscated valuable weapons for themselves.

As the men struggled, the gun fired into the sky.

Before the echoes died, troops fired a volley that brought down half of the Lakota men and boys the soldiers had captured the night before, as well as a number of soldiers surrounding the Lakotas. The uninjured Lakota men attacked the soldiers with knives, guns they snatched from wounded soldiers, and their fists.

As the men fought hand to hand, the Lakota women who had been hitching their horses to wagons for the day’s travel tried to flee along the nearby road or up a dry ravine behind the camp. Stationed on a slight rise above the camp, soldiers turned rapid-fire mountain guns on them. Then, over the next two hours, troops on horseback hunted down and slaughtered all the Lakotas they could find: about 250 men, women, and children.

I'd say judging the 1890’s in 2024 would not make much sense except for the fact the .gov did not bother to learn the lesson in the 103 years after it happened.

At least I heard they were looking into resending the 20 MOH commendations for Wounded Knee.

Pentagon to review 20 Medals of Honor from Wounded Knee Massacre

A panel of five experts will determine by Oct. 15 whether the medals should be retained or rescinded.

www.militarytimes.com

Sigh, I know.

 

[mikegriffith1]

https://dakotabroadcasting.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Wounded-Knee.jpg

December 28, 2024

On the clear, cold morning of December 29, 1890, on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, three U.S.

heathercoxrichardson.substack.com

On the clear, cold morning of December 29, 1890, on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, three U.S. soldiers tried to wrench a valuable Winchester away from a young Lakota man. He refused to give up his hunting weapon. It was the only thing standing between his family and starvation, and he had no faith it would be returned to him as the officer promised: he had watched as soldiers had marked other confiscated valuable weapons for themselves.

As the men struggled, the gun fired into the sky.

Before the echoes died, troops fired a volley that brought down half of the Lakota men and boys the soldiers had captured the night before, as well as a number of soldiers surrounding the Lakotas. The uninjured Lakota men attacked the soldiers with knives, guns they snatched from wounded soldiers, and their fists.

As the men fought hand to hand, the Lakota women who had been hitching their horses to wagons for the day’s travel tried to flee along the nearby road or up a dry ravine behind the camp. Stationed on a slight rise above the camp, soldiers turned rapid-fire mountain guns on them. Then, over the next two hours, troops on horseback hunted down and slaughtered all the Lakotas they could find: about 250 men, women, and children.

I'd say judging the 1890’s in 2024 would not make much sense except for the fact the .gov did not bother to learn the lesson in the 103 years after it happened.

At least I heard they were looking into resending the 20 MOH commendations for Wounded Knee.

Pentagon to review 20 Medals of Honor from Wounded Knee Massacre

A panel of five experts will determine by Oct. 15 whether the medals should be retained or rescinded.

www.militarytimes.com

Sigh, I know.

You have turned the facts upside down. You're quoting Heather Cox Richardson, one of the most biased and misleading scholars on the Wounded Knee incident. Wounded Knee was a battle started by some fanatical Indians who were brainwashed with the Ghost Dance myths. The Indians fired first. Many of the soldiers held their fire to avoid hitting women and children. Most of the women and children who were killed in the initial fighting were killed by their fellow Indians. Have you heard of Father Francis Craft? He was an "Indian lover" who witnessed the event, and he said that the Indians fired first and that all the soldiers he saw fought honorably.

Here's my main article on Wounded Knee: Unwanted Facts about Wounded Knee.

Here's a shorter, introductory article on Wounded Knee: Getting Some Basic Facts Straight About Wounded Knee.

Here's my website on the battle: Wounded Knee: A Battle, Not a Massacre.

 

[Deadstick]

https://dakotabroadcasting.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Wounded-Knee.jpg

December 28, 2024

On the clear, cold morning of December 29, 1890, on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, three U.S.

heathercoxrichardson.substack.com

On the clear, cold morning of December 29, 1890, on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, three U.S. soldiers tried to wrench a valuable Winchester away from a young Lakota man. He refused to give up his hunting weapon. It was the only thing standing between his family and starvation, and he had no faith it would be returned to him as the officer promised: he had watched as soldiers had marked other confiscated valuable weapons for themselves.

As the men struggled, the gun fired into the sky.

Before the echoes died, troops fired a volley that brought down half of the Lakota men and boys the soldiers had captured the night before, as well as a number of soldiers surrounding the Lakotas. The uninjured Lakota men attacked the soldiers with knives, guns they snatched from wounded soldiers, and their fists.

As the men fought hand to hand, the Lakota women who had been hitching their horses to wagons for the day’s travel tried to flee along the nearby road or up a dry ravine behind the camp. Stationed on a slight rise above the camp, soldiers turned rapid-fire mountain guns on them. Then, over the next two hours, troops on horseback hunted down and slaughtered all the Lakotas they could find: about 250 men, women, and children.

I'd say judging the 1890’s in 2024 would not make much sense except for the fact the .gov did not bother to learn the lesson in the 103 years after it happened.

At least I heard they were looking into resending the 20 MOH commendations for Wounded Knee.

Pentagon to review 20 Medals of Honor from Wounded Knee Massacre

A panel of five experts will determine by Oct. 15 whether the medals should be retained or rescinded.

www.militarytimes.com

Sigh, I know.

Indeed they never learn, in fact some are even proud of that atrocity, not just Genocide that day but mutilations etc, one of many such attacks.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Indeed they never learn, in fact some are even proud of that atrocity, not just Genocide that day but mutilations etc, one of many such attacks.

There was no atrocity, no massacre. The Indians started the fighting by shooting at numerous soldiers while under a flag of truce. The soldiers only fired after the Indians fired at them. Many soldiers initially held their fire in order to try to avoid hitting non-combatants. Three independent, non-military eyewitnesses said the Indians fired first, and one of those witnesses was an ardent Indian supporter ("an Indian lover," in the parlance of the day). Even a few of the Indian accounts admit that the Indians fired first.

Also, most of the women and children who were killed were killed by gunfire from the Indians in the meeting circle. When the warriors first fired at the soldiers, they were firing in the direction of their own camp where most of their women and children were standing, because most of the soldiers were positioned between the warriors in the meeting circle and the Indian camp--any shots that missed the soldiers went straight toward the Indian women and children.

Read and educate yourself: LINK

 

[Deadstick]

There was no atrocity, no massacre. The Indians started the fighting by shooting at numerous soldiers while under a flag of truce. The soldiers only fired after the Indians fired at them. Many soldiers initially held their fire in order to try to avoid hitting non-combatants. Three independent, non-military eyewitnesses said the Indians fired first, and one of those witnesses was an ardent Indian supporter ("an Indian lover," in the parlance of the day). Even a few of the Indian accounts admit that the Indians fired first.

Also, most of the women and children who were killed were killed by gunfire from the Indians in the meeting circle. When the warriors first fired at the soldiers, they were firing in the direction of their own camp where most of their women and children were standing, because most of the soldiers were positioned between the warriors in the meeting circle and the Indian camp--any shots that missed the soldiers went straight toward the Indian women and children.

Read and educate yourself: LINK

I bet you deny the Gaza holocaust as well.

 

[mikegriffith1]

I bet you deny the Gaza holocaust as well.

You mean when Hamas fighters murdered over 1,000 Israeli civilians and took hundreds more as hostages on October 7, and then repeatedly used Gazan civilians as human shields, set up rocket and artillery positions in populated areas (in some cases near hospitals), and then fired at the Israelis from those positions when the Israelis launched reprisal attacks against Hamas? You know that Hamas ordered Gazan civilians to stay put and tried to prevent them from leaving, right?

This is so typical of the woke left: you blame the victim and cheer the aggressor; you attack the good guy and glorify the bad guy.

I notice you said nothing about Wounded Knee and the clear evidence that the Indians fired first, that the Indians were given multiple chances to hand over their weapons without even being searched, that most of the women and children who were killed were shot by errant bullets fired by the warriors during the initial fighting at the camp circle, etc., etc. Not a peep from you on this evidence.

 

[whitehall]

President Benjamin Harrison was president when the Wounded Knee tragedy happened. He was the grandson of president Wm. Henry Harrison aka "Old Tippicanoe" who apparently was an Indian fighter. Was there some animosity toward Indians in the Harrison family?

 

[Deadstick]

You mean when Hamas fighters murdered over 1,000 Israeli civilians and took hundreds more as hostages on October 7, and then repeatedly used Gazan civilians as human shields, set up rocket and artillery positions in populated areas (in some cases near hospitals), and then fired at the Israelis from those positions when the Israelis launched reprisal attacks against Hamas? You know that Hamas ordered Gazan civilians to stay put and tried to prevent them from leaving, right?

This is so typical of the woke left: you blame the victim and cheer the aggressor; you attack the good guy and glorify the bad guy.

I notice you said nothing about Wounded Knee and the clear evidence that the Indians fired first, that the Indians were given multiple chances to hand over their weapons without even being searched, that most of the women and children who were killed were shot by errant bullets fired by the warriors during the initial fighting at the camp circle, etc., etc. Not a peep from you on this evidence.

No i mean when Israel killed fifty thousand and counting Palestinians in response, and we still don't know the full facts about October 7 and if the Isralis have anything to do with it we never will, when Hamas attacked they attacked IDF posts for the most part about a third of the casualties were IDF, then we have the Hannibal directive which looks like it wa deployed, if you saw the hundreds of wrecked and burned out cars don't tell me a few guys with AKs and RPGs caused that carnage, they were attacked by Apache choppers with chain guns and hellfire missiles.

 

[whitehall]

No i mean when Israel killed fifty thousand and counting Palestinians in response, and we still don't know the full facts about October 7 and if the Isralis have anything to do with it we never will, when Hamas attacked they attacked IDF posts for the most part about a third of the casualties were IDF, then we have the Hannibal directive which looks like it wa deployed, if you saw the hundreds of wrecked and burned out cars don't tell me a few guys with AKs and RPGs caused that carnage, they were attacked by Apache choppers with chain guns and hellfire missiles.

A Brit making excuses for Hamas? No surprise here. The fact is that Israel's response to the attack that killed 3,000 people and took hundreds of hostages was relatively moderate compared to Pearl Harbor where millions of Japanese were killed and the only time in history (thank God) where nuclear devices were used on civilians. You could make a case that Netanyahu had just as much right to use nuclear weapons as Truman did.

 

[fncceo]

Wounded Knee Massacre - December 29, 1890​

That wasn’t me… I have an alibi.

 

[Deadstick]

A Brit making excuses for Hamas? No surprise here. The fact is that Israel's response to the attack that killed 3,000 people and took hundreds of hostages was relatively moderate compared to Pearl Harbor where millions of Japanese were killed and the only time in history (thank God) where nuclear devices were used on civilians. You could make a case that Netanyahu had just as much right to use nuclear weapons as Truman did.

No sane person would make a case for using nukes on Gaza, but then again Netanyahu isn't sane.

 

[whitehall]

No sane person would make a case for using nukes on Gaza, but then again Netanyahu isn't sane.

No sane person would have permitted a rube president to use nukes on two cities in Japan that had no military value either but it happened. My point is that Netanyahu had the same right to retaliate with nukes as Truman had and we should thank him for not considering the option.

 

[Deadstick]

No sane person would have permitted a rube president to use nukes on two cities in Japan that had no military value either but it happened. My point is that Netanyahu had the same right to retaliate with nukes as Truman had and we should thank him for not considering the option.

We are talking about Imperial Japan involved in total war not some small group of fighters armed with small arms in their own territory.

 

[mikegriffith1]

No i mean when Israel killed fifty thousand and counting Palestinians in response, and we still don't know the full facts about October 7 and if the Isralis have anything to do with it we never will, when Hamas attacked they attacked IDF posts for the most part about a third of the casualties were IDF, then we have the Hannibal directive which looks like it wa deployed, if you saw the hundreds of wrecked and burned out cars don't tell me a few guys with AKs and RPGs caused that carnage, they were attacked by Apache choppers with chain guns and hellfire missiles.

Holy cow! Are you related to Jihad Joe? You must get your news from Hamas/ISIS/AQ/neo-Nazi websites and Iranian state TV. Do you have any idea how many videos were recorded of Hamas's attacks against Israeli civilians, some of which were recorded by Hamas fighters who wanted to brag about their brutality? Are you aware that Hamas's orders to Gazans to stay put and Hamas's attempt to keep Gazans from leaving are a matter of record? Any clue about any of this?

It is sadly ironic and pathetic to see woke leftists siding with Hamas, even though Hamas has imposed sharia law on Gazans, brazenly discriminates against women, has outlawed homosexuality, has squandered most of their foreign aid on weapons and tunnels, etc.

Just curious: Do you think the Holocaust is a hoax perpetrated by the worldwide Zionist conspiracy?

 

[Deadstick]

Holy cow! Are you related to Jihad Joe? You must get your news from Hamas/ISIS/AQ/neo-Nazi websites and Iranian state TV. Do you have any idea how many videos were recorded of Hamas's attacks against Israeli civilians, some of which were recorded by Hamas fighters who wanted to brag about their brutality? Are you aware that Hamas's orders to Gazans to stay put and Hamas's attempt to keep Gazans from leaving are a matter of record? Any clue about any of this?

It is sadly ironic and pathetic to see woke leftists siding with Hamas, even though Hamas has imposed sharia law on Gazans, brazenly discriminates against women, has outlawed homosexuality, has squandered most of their foreign aid on weapons and tunnels, etc.

Just curious: Do you think the Holocaust is a hoax perpetrated by the worldwide Zionist conspiracy?

Quite an hysterical response, and no i don't deny the holocaust happened, that must disappoint you, any sane person would never deny it, my late Father as a British soldier went into Bergen Belsen as it was liberated, i have some photos he took at the camp of the SS guards and the Boss Kramer he was a young man and i know it stayed with him all his life what he saw there, but that doesn't excuse Israel carrying out Genocide and atrocities against Palestinians and we have all seen the evidence of that.

 

[whitehall]

We are talking about Imperial Japan involved in total war not some small group of fighters armed with small arms in their own territory.

It wasn't "total war" at the time. It was a regional mostly Asian conflict until Japan attacked the United States.. The Philippians and Korea and sections of China had the right to be independent of Japanese rule and so does Israel today. Truman had barely six months on the job as president and yet he authorized nuclear weapons on two Japanese cities to convince the Bushido holdouts to surrender unconditionally. Netanyahu had the same option to force the invaders to surrender their hostages and to lay down their arms and concede the fact that Israel is a sovereign nation and we should thank the Israeli government for their remarkable restraint and thank Netanyahu for his leadership.

 

[Deadstick]

It wasn't "total war" at the time. It was a regional mostly Asian conflict until Japan attacked the United States.. The Philippians and Korea and sections of China had the right to be independent of Japanese rule and so does Israel today. Truman had barely six months on the job as president and yet he authorized nuclear weapons on two Japanese cities to convince the Bushido holdouts to surrender unconditionally. Netanyahu had the same option to force the invaders to surrender their hostages and to lay down their arms and concede the fact that Israel is a sovereign nation and we should thank the Israeli government for their remarkable restraint and thank Netanyahu for his leadership.

Netanyahu is a wanted war criminal anyone who can't or won't see that is in total denial, not that i have much confidence to follow through on the indictment.

 

[davebb]

Wooooooooooo!

 

[mikegriffith1]

Netanyahu is a wanted war criminal anyone who can't or won't see that is in total denial, not that i have much confidence to follow through on the indictment.

The bogus tribunal that declared Netanyahu a "war criminal," i.e., the ICC, has a lousy record when it comes to prosecuting actual war criminals, and its case against Netanyahu is baseless. Here's part of a Newsweek editorial on the issue (I trust no one will accuse Newsweek of being a right-wing publication):

It is not enough to demonstrate that civilians suffered based on decisions Israel made while fighting Hamas; the prosecutor must show that Israel acted with the deliberate aim of starving civilians as a method of warfare. This is patently untrue. Israel has made extensive efforts to provide humanitarian aid to Gaza, even under the extraordinary challenge of Hamas's systematic theft and weaponization of such supplies. Any accusation that Israel's objective was to starve innocent civilians—rather than to compel the surrender of Hamas combatants—is not merely unfounded but a libelous distortion of the truth.

Moreover, the Geneva Conventions themselves do not require a sieging party to allow in aid when it will be commandeered by the enemy or provide a military advantage, both of which are indisputably the case with Hamas in Gaza. Similar legal and factual deficiencies undercut all the other charges leveled against Israel, which collapse under the weight of even modest scrutiny. (LINK)

 

[Deadstick]

The bogus tribunal that declared Netanyahu a "war criminal," i.e., the ICC, has a lousy record when it comes to prosecuting actual war criminals, and its case against Netanyahu is baseless. Here's part of a Newsweek editorial on the issue (I trust no one will accuse Newsweek of being a right-wing publication):

It is not enough to demonstrate that civilians suffered based on decisions Israel made while fighting Hamas; the prosecutor must show that Israel acted with the deliberate aim of starving civilians as a method of warfare. This is patently untrue. Israel has made extensive efforts to provide humanitarian aid to Gaza, even under the extraordinary challenge of Hamas's systematic theft and weaponization of such supplies. Any accusation that Israel's objective was to starve innocent civilians—rather than to compel the surrender of Hamas combatants—is not merely unfounded but a libelous distortion of the truth.

Moreover, the Geneva Conventions themselves do not require a sieging party to allow in aid when it will be commandeered by the enemy or provide a military advantage, both of which are indisputably the case with Hamas in Gaza. Similar legal and factual deficiencies undercut all the other charges leveled against Israel, which collapse under the weight of even modest scrutiny. (LINK)

Was it bogus when they indicted Putin ?