The Battle of the Rosebud was an important June 1876 battle that came, on June 17, just days prior to the Battle of the Little Big Horn. Fought by the same Native American combatants, who crossed from their Little Big Horn encampment to counter 993 cavalrymen and mule mounted infantrymen who had marched north from Ft. Fetterman, Wyoming, at the same time troops under Gen. Terry, including Custer's command, were proceeding west from Ft. Abraham Lincoln. Crook's command included, like Terry's, Crow scouts, and he additionally was augmented soon after leaving Ft. Fetterman by Shoshoni combatants.
The battlefield today is nearly untouched.
Called the Battle Where the Sister Saved Her Brother, or the Battle Where the Girl Saved Her Brother, like Little Big Horn, it was a Sioux and Arapaho victory, although it did not turn into an outright disaster like Little Big Horn. Caught in a valley and attacked, rather than attacking into a valley like Custer, the Army took some ground and held its positions, and then withdrew. Crook was effectively knocked out of action for the rest of the year and retreated into the Big Horn mountains in Wyoming.
Dun Giljan's Blog: We can fix the world: When TV was in its infancy, a technician was working on a transmitter on top of the Empire State Building. When he had finished and descende...
We Gen Jones members are trying to figure out our retirement right now (and unlike the Boomers, who at least in the professional class don't seem to retire, we are) and now this:
As Gen-X nears retirement, new survey says the numbers aren’t adding up
The Hagenah took out eleven highway and railway bridges, while causing no causalities, disrupting mandatory Palestine's communications with neighboring states.
Homicide is justifiable when committed by the husband upon one taken in the act of adultery with the wife, provided that the killing takes place before the parties to the act have separated. Such circumstance cannot justify a homicide where it appears that there has been, on the part of the husband, any connivance or assent to the adulterous connection.
Law of the State of Texas prior to 1973.
Frankly, whatever the law is anywhere now, if I were on a jury, I'd consider not convicting under these circumstances. Of course, that's exactly why I'd never be on such a jury. I probably would, but I wouldn't be keen on it.
Indeed, you have to take an oath that you'll uphold the law, and killing somebody is flat out wrong, but I'd not like that duty.
For that matter, I'd be a poor choice for a juror when an "ex" spouse killing a "new" spouse of his former spouse, as that is adultery, as divorce itself is a civil sham. Same story there. I guess I'd uphold my obligations as a juror, if I survived voir dire, which I probably wouldn't.
In some ways, the weeneyness of the current law is a shame.
Maybe the dilution of the current law is the real shame. The old law, including the "heart balm" laws, were regarded as harsh. They weren't harsh, they were realistic. The decline in realism in this area since May 9, 1960, has not bee a good thing in every conceivable way.
The United States proposed to the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission a proposal for United Nations to control all nuclear weapons.
The proposal was remarkable for a number of reason, not the least of which was that it would have subjected the entire collection of the world's nations to a sort of limited central government. It also shows how liberal politics in the U.S. were at the time.
Mexico_Flag_(Cristeros).png: User:Immaculatederivative work: Jorge Compassio, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Mexico enacted the Calles Law attacking the Catholic Church. Clergymen were to be punished for various crimes including wearing clerics and criticizing the government. In a little over a month the Cristero War would break out as a result.
Catholicism was, and is, strong in Mexico, although the Mexican Revolution, which saw the rise of various anti Catholic figures within it, while others remained very loyal to the Church, weakened it. Most historians do not regard the Cristero War as part of the Mexican Revolution, but I'm not most historians and I do. By the same token, the extent to which the Mexican Revolution was part of a worldwide rise of left wing insurrections is not often appreciated.
Anti Catholic elements in Mexico had existed since at least the mid 19th Century, and interestingly reflected similar movements in Europe, which itself shows the extent to which those revolutions in the country in the mid 19th Century reflected how close Mexico was to Europe in comparison to the United States. For all his faults, Porfirio Díaz, who came from a devout Catholic family and who had originally intended to be a Priest, seemingly put those stresses behind the country, but they revived during the Mexican Revolution. Madero was not a practicing Catholic, which in some ways made him an odd leader for the Revolution. Zapata, while he certainly strayed in regard to sexual morality (he had a least fifteen children, but only two by his wife Josefa "La Generala" Espejo Merino, was Catholic. Other figures were most definitely not practicing Catholics and some were anti Catholic within Madero's ranks. In Baja California, American and foreign Wobblies tried to estaliblish an Anarch Socialist state.
Had Madero, who was not a practicing Catholic, but who was egalitarian in nature, survived, Mexico would not have taken the giant left word lurch it did.
Brazil announced its withdrawal from the League of Nations.
The 1876 Republican National Convention convened in Cincinnati, Ohio. Candidates for the office of President, in light of President Grant's decision not to run for a third term, were: Governor Rutherford B. Hayes of Ohio, Former Speaker James G. Blaine of Maine, Treasury Secretary Benjamin Bristow of Kentucky, Senator Oliver P. Morton of Indiana, Senator Roscoe Conkling of New York, Governor John F. Hartranft of Pennsylvania and Postmaster General Marshall Jewell of Connecticut.
Grant remained a highly popular figure, both nationally and internationally, but his administration had been scandal plagued, Democrats had gained in the mid term election, and the country was tragically wearing out on Reconstruction. The latter was not the fault of Grant, as had Andrew Johnson supported it immediately after the Civil War it would have stood to be more effective.
$100 when this bond was issued had the spending power of $1,892.16 today.
How did the U.S. pay off much of the debt from the Second World War and the Cold War?
It inflated the economy out of it.
Let me note something here right from the onset. I think Donald Trump is suffering from dementia in a major way and doesn't come up with plans for anything on his own, very often. Put another way, I think he's a puppet at this stage, pulled by National Conservative and Populist strings, the two not being the same.
Which brings me to this.
What if, behind the scenes, somebody on the NatCon end has come up with the plan to inflate the economy and steal as much of the petroleum oil belonging to Venezuela and Iran as possible.
It'd be way sinister, and evil, and destroy the lives and savings of many, but it might work.
But it'll be devastating to individuals.
Here's how it might works.
Raise tariffs to the point where domestic production actually is increased. That would make everything much more expensive, and hence inflation would result. Putting US oil increasingly on the global market would do the same, as that only happens when the price of oil is high. The value of the debt would decrease as the value of money would decrease.
Crazy?
Well, that's similar to what was done with the World War Two and Cold War debt.
The problem is, of course, that living in inflationary times is devastating to individuals, which is why it can't be, and never has been, done openly.
NatCons, however, may very well like this idea, if they can pull it off. At the end of it the thesis would be that government spending would be brought under control, the national debt greatly reduced, and domestic production realty increased. All of which would be for those who economically survived the ten to twenty year period it'd take to pull it off.
Which many would not.
And it might not work at all. Indeed, it would only work if it was accompanied by high employment, which often high inflation operates against. That's why the increased domestic production would be necessary.
NatCons are a really different group and they've operated in this administration very much in the shadows, which doesn't mean they aren't operating.
This election has been a reminder about being careful about getting tattoos.
Maine Democratic Senatorial candidate Graham Platner, in addition to other skeletons (no pun intended) in his closet, has, or at least had, a large Death's Head tattoo on one of his breasts. Not one like the one above, but one more or less like this:
Shown here:
Well, I say, had, now its this:
We're informed that's a Celtic knot and a dog.
Well, anyhow, this has caused quite a flap, as the design he had is pretty clearly the same one used by the SS during World War Two.
He says he didn't know that. Frankly, while people are incredulous about that, he may very well not have known that.
Indeed, one of the things that's interesting about this, as an (amateur) historian is that suddenly everyone is an expert on World War Two German insignia. I doubt that many people, anymore, were before the last couple of weeks. Indeed, I can recall Walmart getting in trouble some years ago has had a t-shirt it was selling with some Nazi symbology on it, if I recall correctly SS ruins.
Anyhow, the Totenkopf has an interesting and weird history. It's been around for a very long time, and is famously associated with pirates from the 18th Century, who flew various variants of death's head flags, nicknamed the "Jolly Roger", to warn a ship they were approaching that that's what they were. Death's head on a flag threatened death, and the hope was accordingly that the opponent would give up without a fight. Because of the pirate association, legitimate navies coopted the symbol and you can still find it in use to some degree in navies.
The crew of the HMS Utmost showing off their Jolly Roger in February 1942.
The Prussians started using it as a military symbol under Frederick the Great, when it was introduced to hussars. That use was distinct enough that one US state militia unit, formed as hussars, was still using it with a distinctly Prussian style uniform at the start of the Civil War. It also spread to other units in the various German states prior to German unification, and to some other European nations. One Spanish unit, for example used it.
Field Marshall August von Mackensen in 1914 in his full dress hussars uniform.
Infante Fernando wearing the uniform of Spain's 8th Light Armoured Cavalry Regiment "Lusitania" in 1915
After German unification following the Franco Prussian War the pre unification units that used it continued to, with some German units and even individuals adopting it informally. After the German defeat in the Great War, some Freikorps units used it and it carried on in use in German cavalry units.
After Hitler's rise to power, the SS co-opted it almost immediately at the time of their formation, but that didn't actually cause the German Army or the Luftwaffe from using it as well. German panzer troops wore a black uniform with the Totenkopf early on, with the design aat first being identical to the SS in that regard. The SS later changed its design, which Heer panzer units never did.
German panzer soldier, wearing a 1939 black flat cap, with a feldgrau shirt, black tie and black jacket with Totenkopf lapel badge. The first version of the panzer uniform featured a very large black beret.
This actually created some confusion at the time and still does, although the confusion was more of a problem to German troops during the war. By 1944 the Totenkopf was associated with the SS as was the color black, which actually was not worn by most Waffen SS troops. Tanker POWs were easily mistaken for members of the SS and risked being shot out of hand to some degree. By 44, however, black was being phased out for tankers, both in the Heer and SS, in favor of feldgrau. They retained the Totenkopf, however.
As sort of a rough rule of thumb, every member of the SS wore a uniform with a Totenkopf device, including auxiliary units. Armored units of the Heer wore it also, as did the one oddball Luftwaffe armored unit. One Luftwaffe bomber unit used it as a symbol as well. Black uniforms were worn by tankers of all branches early on, and as regular SS dress uniforms, but not as Waffen SS dress uniforms.
This doesn't get into the concentration camp system uniforms, which I don't know anything about, and which were often staffed by auxiliaries. They all wore the deaths head, however.
One Nazi organization that didn't wear the Totenkopf or a black uniform was the Gestapo. Movies and television shows constantly show them doing that, but they didn't. For example, an SS dress uniform is shown being worn by a Gestapo member in both Where Eagles Dare and Hogan's Heroes. In reality, the Gestapo didn't have any uniform at all. The depiction given in Von Ryan's Express is the correct one. They favored civilian dress clothes and trench coats, often leather ones. They were, after all, secret police and were dressed like civilians.
Marine Corps Raiders' insignia.
One US ground unit used it too, the Marine Corps Raiders, which took it from Naval use.
By the war's end the death's head, except in naval use, was hopelessly associated with the SS, although amazingly some use continues on. The South Korean 3rd Infantry Division, the British Army’s Royal Lancers and Brazilian Military Police use it officially. Some Ukrainian units controversially use it which seems to be an intentional effort to associate themselves with the World War Two era Ukrainian National Army which fought both the USSR and the Germans, but the Germans rather late.
Various navies keep using it, but the Nazis didn't taint the pirate association it had on the seas.
One place it oddly saw use was in civilian groups that wanted to cultivate an edge look after the war. All sort of Nazi paraphernalia became associated with motorcycle gangs. And heavy metal bands affected the look as well.
Ian Fraser Kilmister, "Lemmy" of Motörhead who notoriously sported German military and German SS paraphernalia constantly, and who did know what it meant. He claimed to have no Nazi sympathies. His father had been a chaplain in the RAF.
The interesting thing there, I suppose, is that the predecessor to the SS was the SA. The SA didn't use the Totenkopf, but it was comprised of thugs, so in a way the Nazi paraphernalia returned to a demographic that had first used it.
So, what of Platner?
Darned if I know. He says he didn't know what it meant, and I suspect a lot of Americans under 70 years of age don't know what it means. World War Two is simply too long ago for a uniform detail to have much in the cultural memory. Those younger people who do know what it was used for are likely students of history, members of prison gangs, or white supremacists. History students don't get tattooed with the Totenkopf. The other two groups likely do. That doesn't mean that Platner was a white supremacist, however.
It does require some sort of explanation, however.
While on the topic of the tattoos, let's discuss Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defense.
Pete Hegseth is festooned with tattoos.
Pete has a variety of them, which seem to be the following:
Jerusalem Cross, a type4 of Christian cross associated with the Crusades, rightly or wrongly.
"Deus Vult", Latin for "God wills it", a phrase claimed to be associated with the Crusaders.
Kafir, the Arabic for infidel, but also Afrikaans slang for blacks.
Cross & Sword, apparently referencing Matthew 10:34
Yahweh, the Hebrew lettering for the name of God, added near his cross and sword tattoo.
"We the People", The opening phrase of the U.S. Constitution.
American Flag & AR-15.
Roman numerals (1775) & Stars: The year the U.S. Army and the Revolutionary War began.
"Join, or Die" Snake, the Benjamin Franklin cartoon depicting a severed snake, symbolizing colonial unity during the American Revolution.
Infantry Patch.
It's really a bit much. Hegseth is an example of how people become addicted to getting tattoos and won't stop.
So what of it?
Well, the top two tattoos are offensive to some Catholics, myself included. Hegseth is a member of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, he has stated., which is a collection of Evangelical Churches. The Crusades are a Catholic thing, grossly misunderstood, and for which Catholics have taken heat from Protestants for five hundred years. Moreover, the Crusaders would have regarded the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches as heretical.
"Kafir" is a flat out weird thing to tattoo on yourself, and for Sub-Saharan Africans its highly offensive, being the Afrikaans equivalent of the n word. I suppose its supposed to be a taunt at Muslims.
Tattooing Yahweh on yourself is just weird, and potentially offensive to Jews, as well as others. Leviticus 19:28 prohibits tattoos themselves, although this is not regarded by most Christians as applicable to Christians and many modern day Jews do not follow that as well.
The point here is this. Tattooing the Totenkopf on your chest is bound to be offensive to the historically aware. Tattooing Crusader phrases on your body is no doubt offensive to Muslims, although I'm not particularly concerned about that, but it's a cultural appropriation that is offensive to some historically aware Catholics. Kafir, as a tattoo, is outright calculated to be offensive to Muslims, and it's highly offensive to Sub Saharan Africans. And the Yahweh tattoo is disturbing.
I suppose the lesson is to be careful about tattoos. Hegseth is so tatted up its frankly absurd, but he comes across as disturbed. Platner comes across as just sort of messed up.
Of course, you don't get to vote for or against Hegseth, no matter where you live. Your view of him has to weigh into your view of the administration. If you live in Maine, you can weigh the tattoo in your opinion on whether to vote for him or the ancient Susan Collins.
Showing the spirit our age, I suppose, Donald Trump called Platner a pig. Pigs have a highly hierarchal pecking order, so I suppose that's the big pig reacting to a younger one in the pen, if you accept the analogy.
The British government rejected the recommendation of the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry to allow up to 100,000 European Jews to immigrate to Palestine. The British Labour Party attributed the findings to an American desire to avoid immigration to the United States.
Rational minds figured that this was an effort on the part of Lummis to dump on the state in order to help John Cornyn, who no longer needs help as he voted early on against Trump, which means that he didn't love the dear leader enough, and didn't get nominated to run again. Now that Cornyn is political history, and Lummis is leaving the Senate, she doesn't need to crap on us like this any longer, but still is.
We don't want 287 becoming an Interstate. Cynthia knows that.
.jpg)