Reader comments
Mountain Meadows: Church asked to turn over site, take names off records
198 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
Anonymous | 1:17 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
The site of Haun's Mill is owned by the erst-while named 'Reorganized
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints'.
Gripe to THEM about the state of the road to the Mill.
Gripe to THEM about the state of the road to the Mill.
Haun's Mill | 1:21 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
It seems that in debating issues, readers have failed to follow the string of
answers already given. Haun's Mill is owned now by the RLDS or Reorganized
Latter Day Saints, these are the direct linage to Joseph Smith and have over
300,000 members. Access is not denied, the roads may or may not be rough, but it
is now a park like setting.
The issue with decendents and ownership of the land beneath is a lost point. If decendents of Hitler bought up the land beneath jewish memorials, the same tense debates would occur. The Fancher party was largely Methodist and those with relationship to the victims, wish to be the conservators to the final resting place. If we talk of autopsy's that is met with vigorous debate. We could say DNA which is required to ID the remains which would allow the families to relocate the remains as a matter of respect for those that live on today. Soldiers in Iraq, killed are brought home to rest. Leaving victims in a site that makes the Mormons, LDS or Utahan's feel warm and fuzzy, is not honoring the families of victims. You don't want the graves moved and you insist on being the custodial caretakers to the site. Gentiles can not see the point to this failure to compromise. They don't want your land, they want the right to tell their version of what occured here. Turley addressed the role of the Saints in his write up in the churches magazine, it is an acknowledgement that was denied for 150 years, but today, now admits a role of LDS forefathers. In light of the official church response 150 years late, respect, honesty and integrity would and should allow the decendents a respect that was long denied!
The issue with decendents and ownership of the land beneath is a lost point. If decendents of Hitler bought up the land beneath jewish memorials, the same tense debates would occur. The Fancher party was largely Methodist and those with relationship to the victims, wish to be the conservators to the final resting place. If we talk of autopsy's that is met with vigorous debate. We could say DNA which is required to ID the remains which would allow the families to relocate the remains as a matter of respect for those that live on today. Soldiers in Iraq, killed are brought home to rest. Leaving victims in a site that makes the Mormons, LDS or Utahan's feel warm and fuzzy, is not honoring the families of victims. You don't want the graves moved and you insist on being the custodial caretakers to the site. Gentiles can not see the point to this failure to compromise. They don't want your land, they want the right to tell their version of what occured here. Turley addressed the role of the Saints in his write up in the churches magazine, it is an acknowledgement that was denied for 150 years, but today, now admits a role of LDS forefathers. In light of the official church response 150 years late, respect, honesty and integrity would and should allow the decendents a respect that was long denied!
Comments continue below
Poisoned Water Holes | 1:35 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
In Turley's response the poisoned water holes were addressed, these were
North of Filmore, certaining North of Cedar City. The rumors that were started
occured in SLC valley giving logical speculation to involvement from those in
SLC, above and beyond the militia that actually did the deed.
Whatever you believe, whatever your religion, this blog and others following this subject were met with emotional frustration and disagreement. It is a simple truth, not one that will be justified by either camp. To this end the LDS church, not the bloggers here, will have to decide whether the request will be honored or denied? In appeal now, the decendents continue to petition the church and like other news worthy stories, one is brewing here.
The resistance to compromise is fairly understood, but will not change the outcome of the feelings that seperate two seperate views of one event. If its important enough to go to battle for, then it is one more demonstration of why two cultures can not come together. There is ample court records and written documents to indicate the circumstances of the conflict, as for the battle of PR that to is a win or lose battle up for grabs. Is the site of a slaughter going to be the point and issue, where saints chose to make a stand against the decendents of the victims and will that stand be worth the price?
More than the Deseret News is watching this debate, is this the legacy that will follow Turley's acknowledgement of a sad event in history?
Whatever you believe, whatever your religion, this blog and others following this subject were met with emotional frustration and disagreement. It is a simple truth, not one that will be justified by either camp. To this end the LDS church, not the bloggers here, will have to decide whether the request will be honored or denied? In appeal now, the decendents continue to petition the church and like other news worthy stories, one is brewing here.
The resistance to compromise is fairly understood, but will not change the outcome of the feelings that seperate two seperate views of one event. If its important enough to go to battle for, then it is one more demonstration of why two cultures can not come together. There is ample court records and written documents to indicate the circumstances of the conflict, as for the battle of PR that to is a win or lose battle up for grabs. Is the site of a slaughter going to be the point and issue, where saints chose to make a stand against the decendents of the victims and will that stand be worth the price?
More than the Deseret News is watching this debate, is this the legacy that will follow Turley's acknowledgement of a sad event in history?
Aaron | 1:55 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
I don't have a problem with people who just feel suspicious and believe
that Brigham Young ordered the massacre. What is ridiculous about
"September Dawn" is that it presents very dubious things as facts.
The makers of this film aren't trying to start a dialogue or anything else,
they just want to provoke and anger as many Mormons as they can. The General
Authorities are used to being poked and prodded, and unfortunately this is just
par for the course.
Hey Fred | 2:25 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
You got your history wrong...it was not Orson Pratt who was assasinated in
Arkansas, it was his older brother, Parley P. Pratt. Who told you he was
"spiriting off" another man's wife when he was killed. There are
lots of women who joined the church and were baptised in those days simply
because they believed and wanted to become a part of it. One cannot assign
ulterior motives simply because they do not subscribe to the faith. You people
are always looking for a dark side. Get a life.
nearby Mt. Meadows | 2:34 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
What! Turn the Mountain Meadows monument and land over to the Federal
Government!!!! It was the federal government who was partly to blame for
sparking the incident at Mt. Meadows. Their treatment of the Mormons in the
eastern states, and, their sending an Army in that same year to "subdue the
Mormons and their leaders" in what was called "The Utah War" that
fanned the flames. The assasination of Apostle Parley P. Pratt in Arkansas did
not help either. I could never accept the idea that Brigham Young ordered or
condoned what happened there. There is too much evidence standing against such
an absured theory.
Public Relations & MMM | 2:54 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
If you are the LDS Church, and your name is D. Bills or M. Otterson and you are
following the pulse of public opinion on these blogs and elsewhere, is
conservation of the monument site worth the negative PR? With the enormous
television budget for PR and image an important arm of church work, is it worth
it now to draw a line in the sand over who controls 125 acres of rural
landscape? Church PR is not directed to existing members, as much as it is to
the presenation of goodwill outside its membership. If this thread or string is
about the control of the monument, will it be church members that determine the
fate of the grave site or decendents, along with public opinion? My question
would be, which audience is the church playing to and why?
We can ignore the debates above, but the bottom line is that this is a growing issue and a PR nightmare gaining steam, as 2 sides refuse to compromise. Digging in as owners of the land and in control, may not serve the better image of what Latter Day Saints stand for. I think its time the two names about step in and answer this issue, before it heats up to a he said, she said, conflict being aired in the National News. Its time for the Deseret News to do part 2 of this story.
We here on this blog are rocking chair experts and are not likely those that will decide on this complex issue. We have demonstrated for the Deseret News that we are in opposition and not likely to ever see eye-to-eye. I believe DB & MO saw what they needed to see.
Thank You for proving my point to them, not those here!
JB
We can ignore the debates above, but the bottom line is that this is a growing issue and a PR nightmare gaining steam, as 2 sides refuse to compromise. Digging in as owners of the land and in control, may not serve the better image of what Latter Day Saints stand for. I think its time the two names about step in and answer this issue, before it heats up to a he said, she said, conflict being aired in the National News. Its time for the Deseret News to do part 2 of this story.
We here on this blog are rocking chair experts and are not likely those that will decide on this complex issue. We have demonstrated for the Deseret News that we are in opposition and not likely to ever see eye-to-eye. I believe DB & MO saw what they needed to see.
Thank You for proving my point to them, not those here!
JB
Utehead | 3:40 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
Mrhackman states that Ann Eliza Young, one of Brigham's wives wrote in her
biography that Brigham planned it from start to finish. What you fail to
mention is that Ann Eliza Young divorced Brigham and became one of the
church's biggest critics. Further she was only 13 years old when the MMM
occured and didn't even marry Brigham until 11 years afterwards. Not a
great source.
Facts vs Faith | 4:03 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
Its interesting when facts are rejected on either side. If its government
reports of 148 years ago, some here would claim Major Carleton was biased and
did not present the facts. In reverse the saints might lay claim to their
versions as the truth and vice-versa, the truth has 2 or more versions. If its
going to rock your faith, no amount of facts will be accepted as truth. Here
ample U.S. Government documents exist. Former Latter Day Saints have commited
these events to text and certainly skelital remains verify that ill will
occured. Debates here, already ignore the Richard E. Turley report which was
church authorized, therefore submitting facts simply depend on belief and faith.
Because it was under duress, maybe some here can and will deny Turleys version
that made church members culpable.
While readers here have access to a variety of documents, some state and federal, if you believe as a group or religion you were persecuted, then its posible to toss all prior historical documents out the window. They are the enemy and the liars! Church documents in the reverse are not so easily accessable. Most here who have deep read the Mormon theology were forced to rely on the Tanner's and afew others to have the opportunity of reading two sides of the same issue.
In the newspaper we read that victims of MMM were baptised into the Mormon Church is a ritual refered to as "Baptism of the Dead". Ceremony and rituals of the temple are considered sacred and denied to Gentiles, so when the debate gets down to outsiders unwilling to read LDS theology, that is only a half truth. Some are willing, but access to many church documents are still denied to non members.
WWJD
While readers here have access to a variety of documents, some state and federal, if you believe as a group or religion you were persecuted, then its posible to toss all prior historical documents out the window. They are the enemy and the liars! Church documents in the reverse are not so easily accessable. Most here who have deep read the Mormon theology were forced to rely on the Tanner's and afew others to have the opportunity of reading two sides of the same issue.
In the newspaper we read that victims of MMM were baptised into the Mormon Church is a ritual refered to as "Baptism of the Dead". Ceremony and rituals of the temple are considered sacred and denied to Gentiles, so when the debate gets down to outsiders unwilling to read LDS theology, that is only a half truth. Some are willing, but access to many church documents are still denied to non members.
WWJD
Facts | 4:54 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
Please read Clark's statement again. He said the Kirtland Temple AND the
cemetary. You missed the very important AND. He may not have know the exact
name of where they are buried. And may be a connector and it can also be word
to show a difference.
The Moon is Made of Chees! | 4:59 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
Prove it wrong! We never went to the moon, NASA is just a way of spending tax
dollars and all we see on TV is staged! The moon really is made of Cheese,
everyone knows it! If I reject all forms of proof that the Space Program is
real, then I am right and those that agree with me that its all a sham can beat
on pots and pans, calling the world outside liars. I can't be debated,
because any attempt to use logic will be denied. Reality is what I chose it to
be. Some believe the holocaust never occured.
From this blog no amount of facts or logic will pry any one loose. All thats left is having the last word. The FLDS asked to be left alone, to allow god to judge them, but Incest, Child Brides, Evictions and other abuses were going on ignored. It took 53 years from the Short Creek raid for authorities to move in and address a serious issue. The FLDS taught that the moon mission never occured, while their leader in Rulon Jeffs was on the board of directors for Hydrapak. The West Jordan firm manufactured the O-ring, which allowed a plume of fiery gas to escape, igniting the shuttle's liquid-fuel tank. A man who knew the truth, but to the faithful he shaded his truth.
So why not say; "my mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts". Nothing can be said here to override blind faith. But in terms of the monument this way of thinking justifies concerned decendents, for on that plaque not rooted in U.S. History is the version of the attackers, while the victims voices are a muted silence.
WWJD = WHAT WOULD JESUS DO? Does owning the land make might right?
From this blog no amount of facts or logic will pry any one loose. All thats left is having the last word. The FLDS asked to be left alone, to allow god to judge them, but Incest, Child Brides, Evictions and other abuses were going on ignored. It took 53 years from the Short Creek raid for authorities to move in and address a serious issue. The FLDS taught that the moon mission never occured, while their leader in Rulon Jeffs was on the board of directors for Hydrapak. The West Jordan firm manufactured the O-ring, which allowed a plume of fiery gas to escape, igniting the shuttle's liquid-fuel tank. A man who knew the truth, but to the faithful he shaded his truth.
So why not say; "my mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts". Nothing can be said here to override blind faith. But in terms of the monument this way of thinking justifies concerned decendents, for on that plaque not rooted in U.S. History is the version of the attackers, while the victims voices are a muted silence.
WWJD = WHAT WOULD JESUS DO? Does owning the land make might right?
Facts | 5:07 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
Dear Laughinwithyou. I find it interesting that you apparently know the facts
about the MMM based on your statements. I certainly would not want you on any
jury anywhere in the USA. You take for facts that which you cannot prove and
you show your hateful and contentious side.
Your statement about forcing someone to join their church is a fallacious argument and without substance. If work is done on earth for a deceased person that deceased person still has their agency to decide if they want that work to be valid. Forcing someone is against God's gift of agency to mankind. Again you have taken something you have heard and erroneously made an assumption, which is false.
Please get your fact straigh before you continue to put your foot in your mouth and show your bitterness to anything Mormon. Helen Keller had better vision than you.
Your statement about forcing someone to join their church is a fallacious argument and without substance. If work is done on earth for a deceased person that deceased person still has their agency to decide if they want that work to be valid. Forcing someone is against God's gift of agency to mankind. Again you have taken something you have heard and erroneously made an assumption, which is false.
Please get your fact straigh before you continue to put your foot in your mouth and show your bitterness to anything Mormon. Helen Keller had better vision than you.
Haters | 5:11 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
Dear O.M. The finger the man showed you was actually a multiple choice
question. (1) the number of brain cells he has (2) his I. Q. (3) his age or (4)
the total of 1, 2 and 3.
Dear O.A. | 5:23 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
Sorry when I referred to you as O.M. Too many comments and too little substance
gets confusing.
One of the reasons I left CA and returned to Utah is because of the hate shown to me by non Mormons. I never tried to push my religion on them, never belittled their beliefs or values, or lifestyles. I just tried to live my religion to the best of my ability. One neighbor, whom I thought was a good neigbor told me I should join another church my has too many restrictions. Her daughter later repeated this in a letter to our daughter. IT was a very mean spirited letter. They had been very close, but that shut the door. Later the mother wondered why the two were not doing things together. We told her why and she commented. "where would she get that idea." I was told by a member of an interview committee for a position that they didn't want me because they didn't want a Mormon. When I got my Masters I had to defend my religion for 45 minutes because of a close-minded professor. Other students heard about it and complained to the department chair. In both cases I could have sued and most likely won for them using my religion against me. Didn't want to waste my time. Had far too many other important things to do.
Remember, when you point a finger there are three pointing back at you. Be careful when you point out others faults. Be mindful of the beam in your eye and quit trying to find the mote in the other person's eye.
One of the reasons I left CA and returned to Utah is because of the hate shown to me by non Mormons. I never tried to push my religion on them, never belittled their beliefs or values, or lifestyles. I just tried to live my religion to the best of my ability. One neighbor, whom I thought was a good neigbor told me I should join another church my has too many restrictions. Her daughter later repeated this in a letter to our daughter. IT was a very mean spirited letter. They had been very close, but that shut the door. Later the mother wondered why the two were not doing things together. We told her why and she commented. "where would she get that idea." I was told by a member of an interview committee for a position that they didn't want me because they didn't want a Mormon. When I got my Masters I had to defend my religion for 45 minutes because of a close-minded professor. Other students heard about it and complained to the department chair. In both cases I could have sued and most likely won for them using my religion against me. Didn't want to waste my time. Had far too many other important things to do.
Remember, when you point a finger there are three pointing back at you. Be careful when you point out others faults. Be mindful of the beam in your eye and quit trying to find the mote in the other person's eye.
BY Alum | 7:07 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
All posters: Thank you all for all the 165+ posts. Over the weekend I finished
reading "American Massacre" by Decker. A couple of of Months ago I
read "Under the Banner of Heaven". For the audience I have several
questions from these books. I know you(collectively)know about as much if not
more than a lot of these authors. Your help is apprecuated. Did the Danites
participate in burning Gentile farms (tit for tat) in Missouri and Illinois
during the Mormon Wars? Was an Apostate Mormon nearly beaten to death in the
Kirtland Temple? Did the Fancher Party pick up a bunch of Dis-affected LDS in
Springville in route to MM? Who were these LDS People? What became of the spoils
of the MMM? Did one of the several Carriages in the party end up being owned by
BY? What became of it? Did LDS women from Cedar City participate in collecting
clothing and valuables from the corpses? Was some of the clothing identified by
the surviving children as belonging to their mothers? Did some of the Hard
currency end up in Church coffers? Was there "a hewning down" of those
who refused to join in the MMM? Was decapitation part of the Blood attonement
ritual? I thought it was only slitting ones throat. John D. Lee choose death by
Firing Squad but he also had a choice of decapitation (Blood attonement)He said
he had nothing to atone for. Finally in 2002 it was annouced that a Lead letter
in Lee's handwriting was found at Lee's Ferry(?). saying LDS Apostle
George Albert Smith directed Lee to set the MMM wheels in motion. I heard the
LDS says its a fake. The Interior Dept has the letter in custody. When did the
1st presidency become separate from the quoremofthe12?
Senate Document 189/Missouri | 7:17 p.m. Sept. 4, 2007
Page 15 & 16 of Senate Document 189 by witness John Cleminson
When we first went to Daviess, I understood the object to be, to drive out the mob, if one should be collected there; but when we got there we found none. I then learned the object was, from those who were actively engaged in the matter, to drive out all the citizens of Daviess and get possession of their property. It was understood that they burnt Mormon houses, as well as the houses of the other citizens. The burning of the Mormon houses was to bring the Mormons into Diahmon, as I understood it. It was said by some that the Mormons were burning their own houses, and, by others, that the mob was burning them; and so much was said about it, that I did not know when I got the truth. I heard Demick B. Huntington one of the Mormon troops, say that the Missourians at Gallatin, had taken the goods out of Stolling's store, and piled them up and set fire to the storehouse, and had gone off for wagons to haul off the goods; but that our wagons had got there first, and had hauled them off. I understood that the goods were deposited with the bishop of the church at Diahmon, as consecrated property to the church. A great deal of other property was brought into the Mormon camps; but (I do not) know where it came from, but understood it to be consecrated property. It was frequently observed among the troops, that the time had come when the riches of the Gentiles should be consecrated to the Saints.
This is the climate that was created in Missouri in Caldwell to Davies Counties. Read the states document and then we can discuss it!
When we first went to Daviess, I understood the object to be, to drive out the mob, if one should be collected there; but when we got there we found none. I then learned the object was, from those who were actively engaged in the matter, to drive out all the citizens of Daviess and get possession of their property. It was understood that they burnt Mormon houses, as well as the houses of the other citizens. The burning of the Mormon houses was to bring the Mormons into Diahmon, as I understood it. It was said by some that the Mormons were burning their own houses, and, by others, that the mob was burning them; and so much was said about it, that I did not know when I got the truth. I heard Demick B. Huntington one of the Mormon troops, say that the Missourians at Gallatin, had taken the goods out of Stolling's store, and piled them up and set fire to the storehouse, and had gone off for wagons to haul off the goods; but that our wagons had got there first, and had hauled them off. I understood that the goods were deposited with the bishop of the church at Diahmon, as consecrated property to the church. A great deal of other property was brought into the Mormon camps; but (I do not) know where it came from, but understood it to be consecrated property. It was frequently observed among the troops, that the time had come when the riches of the Gentiles should be consecrated to the Saints.
This is the climate that was created in Missouri in Caldwell to Davies Counties. Read the states document and then we can discuss it!
Heidi | 12:00 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has done a great job preserving
the land for all these years. They should continue to do so.
Forensics | 12:55 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007
Teams of Forensic Scientists from the American Academy (AAFS) would be
interested in this project, but what would be the purpose? It would be an
interesting historical paper to investigate the wounds, DNA, etc. but we already
know that the mormons participated in the killings--how does a forensic autopsy
prove if BY authorized it? That seems to be the point of contention. Maybe
this Forensic Scientist is missing something? I guess it all depends on how
much money people want to spend on the forensics-this topic alone could be a
career for someone.
Anonymous | 8:44 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007
For pete's sake people - you keep taking shots at Carrie for that statement
about "Other historians . . . have erroneously associated Brigham Young
with ordering the massacre." For crying out loud didn't you read the
correction at the top of the story?
It says "CORRECTION: Due to an editing error, a story on the Mountain Meadows massacre in Saturday's editions reported that historical accounts have "erroneously" portrayed Brigham Young as the one who ordered the massacre. That sentence should have run as the bylined reporter wrote it: Other historical accounts � and a new fictionalized feature film, "September Dawn" � have portrayed Young as the one who ordered the massacre.
If you read the corrected version of that statement, you will see that Carrie didn't report it in the biased manner you all keep critcizing her for but when the story was edited, a biased statement she didn't write was introduced in. Give her a break!
It says "CORRECTION: Due to an editing error, a story on the Mountain Meadows massacre in Saturday's editions reported that historical accounts have "erroneously" portrayed Brigham Young as the one who ordered the massacre. That sentence should have run as the bylined reporter wrote it: Other historical accounts � and a new fictionalized feature film, "September Dawn" � have portrayed Young as the one who ordered the massacre.
If you read the corrected version of that statement, you will see that Carrie didn't report it in the biased manner you all keep critcizing her for but when the story was edited, a biased statement she didn't write was introduced in. Give her a break!
utahkeith | 9:41 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007
this is rediculous, why would they give it to someone else to botch up? The
church has it so it is tax free, and they aren't going out of business
anytime soon or ever for that matter. Give it a rest, they are honoring those
who died there, get over it!!!
rj | 10:32 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007
good grief, it's been 150 years, move on, get over it, and do something
constructive. Yes, it was an awful event, it was wrong, it was wicked, and it
was repulsive. But so were all the murders and abuses the church suffered prior
to and after the Mountain Meadows event.
We all wish this thing had not happened, but this involves people who have all died a hundred years ago. Nobody living had anything to do with this, and to try to pretend to extract justice at this point is absurd.
We all wish this thing had not happened, but this involves people who have all died a hundred years ago. Nobody living had anything to do with this, and to try to pretend to extract justice at this point is absurd.
d68 | 10:55 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007
I am a direct descendant of the messenger that was sent to stop the attack on
the Fancher party. He was sent by Brigham Young. His testimony is in the
territorial records. I have read a copy of it. He states plainly that Young
ordered the Mormons in and around Cedar City to not harm any pioneers passing
through, even if it meant war with I believe the Paiutes. He carried this
message personally and arrived a few days late. Nothing has ever been found by
family members in his diaries or personal records that contradicts his original
testimony. My mother is in the process of trying to obtain the documents from a
great-aunt for publication.
Buck0 | 11:40 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007
This is a facinating period of history. What would Abe Lincoln have done about
this incident hadn't it been for the Civil War?
Stop, Enough is Enough | 1:07 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007
MMM is a dead horse, leave it to rest. All is well in 2007. Let the canker heal.
MM is a fitting resting place, well maintained, etc. Get on with your lives. We
have work enough to do ere the sun goes down.
BY Alum | 1:37 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007
To Senate Doc 189: Is there an internet link to the states document? Which
state? Thanks in advance.
Others: Continuing my questions to the audience; Another part of the Fancher/Baker party was a couple days behind the MM group what became of them? Where was LDS apostle George Albert Smith in the weeks prior to MM? Are there any records of Apostle Smith church talks in S. Utah prior to MM? Did other wagon trains have difficulties travesing Southern Utah? In "Under the Banner of Heaven" there is a mention post-MM of one train losing their herd of cattle and the trouble they had getting it back. What did BY mean when he visited the cairn in MM previously erected by the US army (Post 1857)to the sign that(approximately)said "Vengance is mine thus saith the Lord" to which BY said "Vengance is mine and I have taken a little"
Others: Continuing my questions to the audience; Another part of the Fancher/Baker party was a couple days behind the MM group what became of them? Where was LDS apostle George Albert Smith in the weeks prior to MM? Are there any records of Apostle Smith church talks in S. Utah prior to MM? Did other wagon trains have difficulties travesing Southern Utah? In "Under the Banner of Heaven" there is a mention post-MM of one train losing their herd of cattle and the trouble they had getting it back. What did BY mean when he visited the cairn in MM previously erected by the US army (Post 1857)to the sign that(approximately)said "Vengance is mine thus saith the Lord" to which BY said "Vengance is mine and I have taken a little"
In my Opinion | 8:54 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007
It is easy to say Mormons done a great job preserving the land for all these
years.
That is not the point. The focus of this massacre is to lead responsibility from the Mormon leadership and apologized for such killings.
There is not doubt that Young knew the attack he didn�t do anything but cover up such massacre and used John D. Lee to avoid a confrontation with the US Army.
I wonder how Mormons feel of a religion that murdered children and women in the name of God.
Anyway what was the reason that Mormons murdered innocent children and women?
That is not the point. The focus of this massacre is to lead responsibility from the Mormon leadership and apologized for such killings.
There is not doubt that Young knew the attack he didn�t do anything but cover up such massacre and used John D. Lee to avoid a confrontation with the US Army.
I wonder how Mormons feel of a religion that murdered children and women in the name of God.
Anyway what was the reason that Mormons murdered innocent children and women?
Sorry d68 | 9:53 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007
Much too little, too late. All said documents were produced after the fact, and
used during the trial. The journal letters that you refer to were reproduced
during the trials many years after MMM - along with numerous other similar
documents that were thrown out of court because their authenticity and timing
could not be proved. More damaging to BY than everything else, is BY's
known cover-up of events. Although true enough that he had his reasons for
covering up his knowledge of MMM, the mere fact that it went on for almost two
decades is evidence enough. Even if BY didn't participate in the actual
"trigger pulling", he directed the creation of an atmosphere of
religious fanaticism, rhetoric, distrust and paranoia - providing sufficient
catalyst for the events that followed.
In saying this I am in no way implying that secular decisions both inside and outside the church helped foment this explosive environment. Rumors, innuendos, false accusations on every front contributed to MMM. And, it all started years earlier in New York, Illinois and almost every other location that the Mormons inhabited. Putting it bluntly, they were bad neighbors. Voting as a block, bankruptcy, criminal banking practices, unsuccessful land speculation, offensive polygamy practices that were practiced and lied about, extermination orders by Boggs that were generated as a result of similarly offensive false and exaggerated rumors about the Mormons - - - etc. etc.
Frontier people were mostly honest, hardworking foreigners. If Mormons deify their early leadership and are blind to the responsibility and fault that they held in creating their own problems, they must realize that they are still promoting and creating their own problems. Any rational person would want to learn from the past and move on. Mormon attitudes make this difficult.
In saying this I am in no way implying that secular decisions both inside and outside the church helped foment this explosive environment. Rumors, innuendos, false accusations on every front contributed to MMM. And, it all started years earlier in New York, Illinois and almost every other location that the Mormons inhabited. Putting it bluntly, they were bad neighbors. Voting as a block, bankruptcy, criminal banking practices, unsuccessful land speculation, offensive polygamy practices that were practiced and lied about, extermination orders by Boggs that were generated as a result of similarly offensive false and exaggerated rumors about the Mormons - - - etc. etc.
Frontier people were mostly honest, hardworking foreigners. If Mormons deify their early leadership and are blind to the responsibility and fault that they held in creating their own problems, they must realize that they are still promoting and creating their own problems. Any rational person would want to learn from the past and move on. Mormon attitudes make this difficult.
Sherry - Idaho | 10:47 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007
Seriously: How can any intelligent, sensible person who can read, reason, pray
and discern right from wrong - believe in the divinity of the origins of the
Mormon Church? The democratization of Christianity: swinging from extremely
theocratic, authoritarian institutions - to Americanized views of God, personal
opportunities and lay persons as clergy to name a few early American twists on
Christianity.
But seriously!!! The Garden of Eden in Jackson County Missouri?? Jesus returning and directing his world from two mission command centers (Jerusalem and Missouri)??? Polygamy as an eternal practice?? Blood atonement as practice by Mormons during early 1856 through Mountain Meadows Massacre?? Orin Porter Rockwell (defender of BY) Bill Hickman - killer in the name of God?? God telling a man that "all other churches are abominations"?? - this one is not just the language of the day: this was supposedly an actual quote by God. Brown skinned "Lamanites" as early ancestors of American Indians?? And, this brown skin being a curse from God because they were idle, slothful and killed God's other chosen people, the Nephites??
I agree that Mormons have evolved into seemingly good people with great families and work ethics. But please, let�s keep it at that, and not apply a special "chosen people with all the truth" label.
Please take a step back, forget the defense that Mormons are a "peculiar" people, and realize that you can still have God's love without all the stupidity. Even if God doesn't exist, I feel that it is far better to love and be good for the sake of loving and being good, rather than trying to obtain the Celestial Kingdom, where incidentally you can't be visited by relatives and friends in the two lover kingdoms, but you are allowed to "visit down".
Please, please, please!
But seriously!!! The Garden of Eden in Jackson County Missouri?? Jesus returning and directing his world from two mission command centers (Jerusalem and Missouri)??? Polygamy as an eternal practice?? Blood atonement as practice by Mormons during early 1856 through Mountain Meadows Massacre?? Orin Porter Rockwell (defender of BY) Bill Hickman - killer in the name of God?? God telling a man that "all other churches are abominations"?? - this one is not just the language of the day: this was supposedly an actual quote by God. Brown skinned "Lamanites" as early ancestors of American Indians?? And, this brown skin being a curse from God because they were idle, slothful and killed God's other chosen people, the Nephites??
I agree that Mormons have evolved into seemingly good people with great families and work ethics. But please, let�s keep it at that, and not apply a special "chosen people with all the truth" label.
Please take a step back, forget the defense that Mormons are a "peculiar" people, and realize that you can still have God's love without all the stupidity. Even if God doesn't exist, I feel that it is far better to love and be good for the sake of loving and being good, rather than trying to obtain the Celestial Kingdom, where incidentally you can't be visited by relatives and friends in the two lover kingdoms, but you are allowed to "visit down".
Please, please, please!
radrelic | 11:36 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007
"I wonder how Mormons feel of a religion that murdered children and women
in the name of God.
Anyway what was the reason that Mormons murdered innocent children and women? "
In reply, every time a "Mormon" tries to tell the reason-the issue then turns to "that doesn't justify it" Nope murder is justifiable but I personally haven't murdered anyone.
The cover up was done to protect the fledgling religion and the people who did the deed. Why? Because no good could be seen in letting out the truth. Men who killed did as militia and all weregiven amnesty but Lee. Why not Lee? Because slavering dogs needed blood after blood was spilled.
A wild cat, cougar or bear driven against the wall is a dangerous animal. Mormons driven to the brink of civilization and then have armies coming at them from east and west (yes west, up Colorado by steamboat and on camels) No TV to announce their intentions.
Conditions harsh on the remote edge of Mormon civilization.
Why did not God stop it? At any point in the spiral just one little change may have prevented but He let it go forth.
Fault the Mormons but you do nothing to add to the truth. No one intended or planned the event as a wonderful calculation. A series of events that spiralled.
The tone of the anti-Moromns on this blog can give an exa,ple of how the two sides would have had reasons to kill each other.
But why are we refighting this old dispute. It happened. It wasn't nice but it didn't rehappen and rehappen. Was an anomaly.
"Weren't nice neighbors?" Most people aren't who can outcompete the locals and prosper.They knew of the unannounced polygamy?
My ancestors, some Roman Cathlics did inquisition and killed 10,000 Cathars.
Anyway what was the reason that Mormons murdered innocent children and women? "
In reply, every time a "Mormon" tries to tell the reason-the issue then turns to "that doesn't justify it" Nope murder is justifiable but I personally haven't murdered anyone.
The cover up was done to protect the fledgling religion and the people who did the deed. Why? Because no good could be seen in letting out the truth. Men who killed did as militia and all weregiven amnesty but Lee. Why not Lee? Because slavering dogs needed blood after blood was spilled.
A wild cat, cougar or bear driven against the wall is a dangerous animal. Mormons driven to the brink of civilization and then have armies coming at them from east and west (yes west, up Colorado by steamboat and on camels) No TV to announce their intentions.
Conditions harsh on the remote edge of Mormon civilization.
Why did not God stop it? At any point in the spiral just one little change may have prevented but He let it go forth.
Fault the Mormons but you do nothing to add to the truth. No one intended or planned the event as a wonderful calculation. A series of events that spiralled.
The tone of the anti-Moromns on this blog can give an exa,ple of how the two sides would have had reasons to kill each other.
But why are we refighting this old dispute. It happened. It wasn't nice but it didn't rehappen and rehappen. Was an anomaly.
"Weren't nice neighbors?" Most people aren't who can outcompete the locals and prosper.They knew of the unannounced polygamy?
My ancestors, some Roman Cathlics did inquisition and killed 10,000 Cathars.
OL | 11:45 a.m. Sept. 6, 2007
Sherry - Idaho needs to calm down a little. It's okay, breathe in..
breathe out.. etc.
To Sorry d68 - I think you need to get your facts straight.
To Sorry d68 - I think you need to get your facts straight.
James | 12:04 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007
Sherry - Idaho,
Thank you for your thought provoking post.
Thank you for your thought provoking post.
Scott Allen | 12:51 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007
You know what doesn't make sense is why all the Christian denominations
attack with so much anger more often than not? Wasn't it Christ who said
the fruits of the spirit are peace, long suffering..." and along that same
note why are the Mormons attacking back. We all just need to calm down see the
FACTS accept them and move on and all of us need to remember tht since each camp
believes that the other was created by man that "The works of Man will come
to naught but the works of God are eternal."
Both quotes are found in the bible sorry if they are paraphrased I don't have it with me.
Both quotes are found in the bible sorry if they are paraphrased I don't have it with me.
Michaelitos | 4:35 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007
Sherry in Idaho. . . . WOW! That's completely off the mark, out in left
field, or any other colloquialism that means, "you are off topic." I
thought we were discussing the Mountain Meadow Massacre.
You know, for a person claiming to espouse love in all its wonderful glory, you sure do breathe a lot of hate.
You know, for a person claiming to espouse love in all its wonderful glory, you sure do breathe a lot of hate.
Seperation of Church & State | 9:02 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007
Can we address this without religion or would that remove 90% of those here? To
Alum, Senate Document 189 is a Missouri State record. What is good in it, is
the testimony of witnesses from both sides. Both Joseph Smith's witnesses
and the states, tell the same series of events. Why is this relivent? Because of
the arguement to justify MMM from the Haun's Mill event, which occured 2
days prior to Joseph Smith surrendering to authorities.
Now I thought Sherry presented her views well, but then with 2 basic positions, those who are refusing to accept state and federal records, including Major Carleton's investigation by the U.S. Army, she is naturally going to be beat down by church apologist. Seperate this making it clinical and as a crime scene, leaving religion at the door and there is ample evidence of what has led readers here.
I stood on the monument site yesterday, Carleton had 80 soldiers with him for protection and to investigate the crime scene. The Major was from Fort Tejon. Some very interesting points are etched in stone, by the current caretakers as in the church and some of these points are lost to this blog. I drove 860 miles to document and photograph this site and a nearby parcel of land that could make a decent monument to the event, one that is not under the control of the decendents of the militia. No need to say church here!
Here there is a crime scene! To the forensic guy, you missed the point, examination of the remains is historical, lest revisionist rewrite history to their own desire. The DNA issue is to identify the family members who may want to relocated the resting place, unless holding corpses hostage is a reflection of Baptism of the Dead?
Now I thought Sherry presented her views well, but then with 2 basic positions, those who are refusing to accept state and federal records, including Major Carleton's investigation by the U.S. Army, she is naturally going to be beat down by church apologist. Seperate this making it clinical and as a crime scene, leaving religion at the door and there is ample evidence of what has led readers here.
I stood on the monument site yesterday, Carleton had 80 soldiers with him for protection and to investigate the crime scene. The Major was from Fort Tejon. Some very interesting points are etched in stone, by the current caretakers as in the church and some of these points are lost to this blog. I drove 860 miles to document and photograph this site and a nearby parcel of land that could make a decent monument to the event, one that is not under the control of the decendents of the militia. No need to say church here!
Here there is a crime scene! To the forensic guy, you missed the point, examination of the remains is historical, lest revisionist rewrite history to their own desire. The DNA issue is to identify the family members who may want to relocated the resting place, unless holding corpses hostage is a reflection of Baptism of the Dead?
Monument Location | 9:28 p.m. Sept. 6, 2007
Does the current caretaker object to a second monument near the original
location or would that meet with opposition as well? A court order to relocate
some of the graves and the owner of 125 acres could lay claim to owning the
dirt, where the blood was spilled.
Decendents could buy their own land, there is land For sale up there. I'm sure after claiming these Methodist victims as Mormon is the ritual of a proxy Baptism of the Dead, there might be an issue to who owns these victims soul's! You might want to tell the readers who else gets baptised after they die! I'm sure with LDS relatives myself, that one will claim me after I am without breath. I think its time to explain the LDS belief in detail. Can I quote here word for word the Book of Mormon from 1830? Polygamy or such fornication was forbidden in the 1830 version. By 1851 7 years after JS death in the "Pearl of Great Price" polygamy was permitted, but Smith was not alive to publish this.
Then there is this issue of the Deseret News, is it a peoples paper or because it is Church owned, is it a mouthpiece that reserves the right of censorship. Two sides disagree and here, yawn-yawn, those that disagree are told to get a life! If you are permitted to believe a fantasy, why can't readers who disagree state an opinion different under FREE SPEECH? You need to remember Nauvoo, Smith ordered the Newspaper of the Law Brothers destroyed on June 10th of 1844 leading to the conflict that got him killed.
Censorship here because saints disagree is a poor excuse to stop reading Deseret News. Will Mitt Romney share your views? He wants our votes, probably not our opinions!
Decendents could buy their own land, there is land For sale up there. I'm sure after claiming these Methodist victims as Mormon is the ritual of a proxy Baptism of the Dead, there might be an issue to who owns these victims soul's! You might want to tell the readers who else gets baptised after they die! I'm sure with LDS relatives myself, that one will claim me after I am without breath. I think its time to explain the LDS belief in detail. Can I quote here word for word the Book of Mormon from 1830? Polygamy or such fornication was forbidden in the 1830 version. By 1851 7 years after JS death in the "Pearl of Great Price" polygamy was permitted, but Smith was not alive to publish this.
Then there is this issue of the Deseret News, is it a peoples paper or because it is Church owned, is it a mouthpiece that reserves the right of censorship. Two sides disagree and here, yawn-yawn, those that disagree are told to get a life! If you are permitted to believe a fantasy, why can't readers who disagree state an opinion different under FREE SPEECH? You need to remember Nauvoo, Smith ordered the Newspaper of the Law Brothers destroyed on June 10th of 1844 leading to the conflict that got him killed.
Censorship here because saints disagree is a poor excuse to stop reading Deseret News. Will Mitt Romney share your views? He wants our votes, probably not our opinions!
orion's arm of the Galaxy | 8:10 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007
In reference to Seperation of Church and State's implication that we use
corpses for baptisms for the dead.
The Mormon church doesn't actually baptize the corpses we use living people who are worthy to baptize and go to the temple as a proxy or, for lack of a better term, a transformer to relay the blessings should the souls choose to accept them, even here they have a choice it isn't complusuary, wonderring how I know this I've been in several baptisimal sessions.
The Mormon church doesn't actually baptize the corpses we use living people who are worthy to baptize and go to the temple as a proxy or, for lack of a better term, a transformer to relay the blessings should the souls choose to accept them, even here they have a choice it isn't complusuary, wonderring how I know this I've been in several baptisimal sessions.
re:Monument location | 8:23 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007
1 Corinthians 15:29
John 3:5
The names done by proxy baptism are not added to the roles of the church as new members. Their souls are not claimed, and they have their agency to choose whether to accept or reject.
If another religion wants to spin around three times and blow bubbles out their nose, in hopes of saving mine or my ancestors soul, what would I care? If I don't believe it, what difference does it make?
In fact we would be rather flattered.
Now if they want to condemn us to hell, which many have openly stated, that's another matter, but again, what can we do about it. There is this little constitutional right called "Freedom of Religion".
Relax! Let all mankind worship how where or what they may.
John 3:5
The names done by proxy baptism are not added to the roles of the church as new members. Their souls are not claimed, and they have their agency to choose whether to accept or reject.
If another religion wants to spin around three times and blow bubbles out their nose, in hopes of saving mine or my ancestors soul, what would I care? If I don't believe it, what difference does it make?
In fact we would be rather flattered.
Now if they want to condemn us to hell, which many have openly stated, that's another matter, but again, what can we do about it. There is this little constitutional right called "Freedom of Religion".
Relax! Let all mankind worship how where or what they may.
Proxy was Noted | 8:48 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007
I believe the post stated "the ritual of a proxy Baptism of the Dead",
proxy meaning that someone stood in for the dearly departed. In an earlier post
I noted the premis "should the souls choose to accept them". Since
the LDS church acknowledges in this article that the victims, mostly Methodist
were indeed Baptised into the faith, we must then assume they discarded their
faith in life, in exchange for your faith after they departed.
Is this correct? A yes or no, even an explanation, but please don't side step or ignore the question.
Is this correct? A yes or no, even an explanation, but please don't side step or ignore the question.
Kevan B | 9:35 a.m. Sept. 7, 2007
Hey Carrie, great article! You can throw your grass clippings in my yard
anytime!
Deseret News | 1:34 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007
Why not out of respect for the victims and the readers offer the Major Carleton
report to congress in its entirety. It in a nut shell explains why anger is
centered around this sad part of history.
This document available through: Government Printing Office Library of Congress Call #: F826.C26 1902
The scene of the massacre, even at this late day, was horrible to look upon. Women's hair, in detached locks and masses, hung to the sage bushes and was strewn over the ground in many places. Parts of little children's dresses and of female costume dangled from the shrubbery or lay scattered about; and among these, here and there, on every hand, for at least a mile in the direction of the road, by two miles east and west, there gleamed, bleached white by the weather, the skulls and other bones of those who had suffered. A glance into the wagon when all these had been collected revealed a sight which can never be forgotten. The idea of the melancholy procession of that great number of women and children, followed at a distance by their husbands and brothers, after all their suffering, their watching, their anxiety and grief, for so many gloomy days and dismal nights at the corral, thus moving slowly and sadly up to the point where the Mormons and Indians lay in wait to murder them; these doomed and unhappy people literally going to their own funeral; the chill shadows of night closing darkly around them, sad precursors of the approaching shadows of a deeper night, brings to the mind a picture of human suffering and wretchedness on the one hand, and of human treachery and ferocity upon the other, that cannot possibly be excelled by any other scene that ever before occurred....
This document available through: Government Printing Office Library of Congress Call #: F826.C26 1902
The scene of the massacre, even at this late day, was horrible to look upon. Women's hair, in detached locks and masses, hung to the sage bushes and was strewn over the ground in many places. Parts of little children's dresses and of female costume dangled from the shrubbery or lay scattered about; and among these, here and there, on every hand, for at least a mile in the direction of the road, by two miles east and west, there gleamed, bleached white by the weather, the skulls and other bones of those who had suffered. A glance into the wagon when all these had been collected revealed a sight which can never be forgotten. The idea of the melancholy procession of that great number of women and children, followed at a distance by their husbands and brothers, after all their suffering, their watching, their anxiety and grief, for so many gloomy days and dismal nights at the corral, thus moving slowly and sadly up to the point where the Mormons and Indians lay in wait to murder them; these doomed and unhappy people literally going to their own funeral; the chill shadows of night closing darkly around them, sad precursors of the approaching shadows of a deeper night, brings to the mind a picture of human suffering and wretchedness on the one hand, and of human treachery and ferocity upon the other, that cannot possibly be excelled by any other scene that ever before occurred....
Arm of Orion | 2:14 p.m. Sept. 7, 2007
To proxy was noted
No we believe that they can chose to change their faith and our beliefs after this life. Even in the next life there is choice at all times so if one chooses to change faiths and have been baptized by proxy from a temple goer then can the full blessings be given.
Basically what happens in baptisms is we offer them the blessings that we belive comes with baptism and if the dead accept it then then they have the full blessings of church membership given unto them.
If anyone has a more articulate way of stating this practice then please do it I am a poor writer when I am contained to a certain amount of words.
No we believe that they can chose to change their faith and our beliefs after this life. Even in the next life there is choice at all times so if one chooses to change faiths and have been baptized by proxy from a temple goer then can the full blessings be given.
Basically what happens in baptisms is we offer them the blessings that we belive comes with baptism and if the dead accept it then then they have the full blessings of church membership given unto them.
If anyone has a more articulate way of stating this practice then please do it I am a poor writer when I am contained to a certain amount of words.
Bills | 12:55 a.m. Sept. 9, 2007
No one can fault the Church for doing an outstanding job in caring for the monument. I say, let the dead rest in peace and may the living learn to forgive.
Testing 1, 2 3! | 7:50 p.m. Sept. 9, 2007
I heard this string was shut down? Just testing it, to see.
SG/NBC
SG/NBC
Arkansan | 11:14 p.m. Sept. 14, 2007
It has been mentioned in a few posts that the LDS Church Organization does not
own the entire MMM site. It has also been mentioned that the text on the
monuments have been carefully scripted to avoid any negative reflections on the
Morman Church. There have been several references to the legal scurrying to
remove the disturbed remains from custody of forensic anthropologist, Shannon
Novak and associates. It has been less clearly stated that there are several
mass gravesites that are not maintained by the LDS or private landowners.
Nothing has been mentioned about difficulties of visiting these less known
sites. Why would grass-roots organizations want to remove the entire MMM site
from control of the LDS Church and its members?
1) The entire site is not maintained and descendants have sometimes been denied access to the non-church owned sites.
2) The possibility that burial sites and skeletal would be destroyed.
3) The Mormans failed to bury the dead after the massacre but instead left the victims to be devoured by wild animals, their bones dragged over many acres of the land in question.
4)Only in the recent past has the MMM site been readily accessible with well-maintained roads.
5) The first stone cairn was torn down by Mormans at the instigation of Brigham Young, according to testimony of eye-witnesses.
Seems reasonable to me that some of the descendants may have fears that their family burial grounds could be at risk.
1) The entire site is not maintained and descendants have sometimes been denied access to the non-church owned sites.
2) The possibility that burial sites and skeletal would be destroyed.
3) The Mormans failed to bury the dead after the massacre but instead left the victims to be devoured by wild animals, their bones dragged over many acres of the land in question.
4)Only in the recent past has the MMM site been readily accessible with well-maintained roads.
5) The first stone cairn was torn down by Mormans at the instigation of Brigham Young, according to testimony of eye-witnesses.
Seems reasonable to me that some of the descendants may have fears that their family burial grounds could be at risk.
Arkansan | 11:36 a.m. Sept. 15, 2007
I forgot to include that
6) The second monument build by the US Army was also torn down by Mormans.
7)The poorly maintained stone marker erected in 1932 by the Utah Pioneer Trails and Landmarks Association, accessible from roadways with no identifying signs, could be reached only by a steep climb.
8)The church agreed to restore the gravesite in 1998 because complaints had been received of "the deplorable condition of the site."
As a descendant of the portion of the Arkansas wagon train which took the northern route out of SLC, I believe that a good faith and excellent policical move on the part of the LDS church and other current owners of the killing field would be to donate the entire site, with substantial funds for maintenance, to an independently administered trust. This would go far to heal the bitterness felt by those on both sides of the disagreement and the public relations nightmare that continues to haunt the LDS.
6) The second monument build by the US Army was also torn down by Mormans.
7)The poorly maintained stone marker erected in 1932 by the Utah Pioneer Trails and Landmarks Association, accessible from roadways with no identifying signs, could be reached only by a steep climb.
8)The church agreed to restore the gravesite in 1998 because complaints had been received of "the deplorable condition of the site."
As a descendant of the portion of the Arkansas wagon train which took the northern route out of SLC, I believe that a good faith and excellent policical move on the part of the LDS church and other current owners of the killing field would be to donate the entire site, with substantial funds for maintenance, to an independently administered trust. This would go far to heal the bitterness felt by those on both sides of the disagreement and the public relations nightmare that continues to haunt the LDS.
Nauvoo Christian | 8:09 a.m. Sept. 20, 2007
Not only do you NOT report your stories correct, but you don't bother
answer your emails neither...but then the is what the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints is good at, so why not its members!???
faye | 12:14 p.m. Sept. 26, 2007
With 200 words remaining, I offer my condolences and love to all those who have
suffered for this horrendous and cowardly deed. My great great grandfather was
executed for the murder of these women and chikdren (primarily). The massacre
site, I believe should be at least owned (shared, perhaps) by the descendents.
John D Lee was a noble and capable pioneer. He was a close friend to Brigham
Young. In his memmiors he stated that should he state Brigham Young ordered the
massacare, he would be freed. He refused. There has been no evidence that Mr.
Young had prior knowledge of the massacre. Sept 11 was a dark and shameful day.
Will we, as a people learn from it. I doubt it.
Faye Krause, Great great grandaughter
Faye Krause, Great great grandaughter
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Members of the Mormon History Association tour the Mountain Meadows Massacre site near Enterprise.
- 5 top publishers plan Kindle rival 10:10 a.m.
- Obama has sharp criticism for GOP 9:48 a.m.
- Home invasion suspects sought 9:44 a.m.
- Andersen apologizes for Jordan hoax 9:37 a.m.
- Survey: Few plan hires in next 6 mos. 9:32 a.m.
- Market slides as dollar strengthens 9:23 a.m.
- 911 call for Woods' mother-in-law 9:22 a.m.
- McChrystal: 'No silver bullets' 9:14 a.m.
- U.N.: '00-'09 warmest decade 8:59 a.m.
- Pope keeps Spanish Steps tradition 8:54 a.m.
- Witness: Mitchell stalked victims
- BYU football: Bronco weighs in on Hall
- Cougars going back to Vegas
- Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil
- Williams' late jumper tops Spurs
- Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing
- TCU's BCS game missing something
- BYU eager for crack at Oregon State
- TCU to play Boise in Fiesta Bowl
- Store planning for Palin crush
- Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing
265 - TCU to play Boise in Fiesta Bowl203
- Letters: Global warming a lie177
- Cougars going back to Vegas147
- Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil137
- George lost in rivalry hatefest119
- Ed Smart 'appalled' at testimony100
- Harpring's NBA career is over98
- Utahns want health care reform bills82
- Utes excited to go to San Diego79
That does it — I'm having an affair! Thanks to Tiger Woods, David...
Latest comments
Sports is a learning effort for 99.9%+ of those playing a sport. Most of us...
Every year I am shoveling more and more of that "Global Warming" off my...
Why is this still news? Media...please stop reporting on this. This is NOT...
Max'comments not only proved he is a poor loser but a poor winner also.
Exactly so.
Max obviously got under your skin Ute fans. You realize they're just words?...
God is in control and "he gave man dominion over all the earth." Are we...
What part of Texas do you live in? Fantastic schools? About 50% of the...
Maybe we should take it up to the ski resorts and put it into big lamps, and...
You aren't going to get the truth from major media or from the government....
Advertisements
I won't get into the argument, but this article, and the September Dawn movie, plus the impossibility for many to let it go, makes me question the motives of anyone wanting to take over the maintenance of the MMM site. Do they want to maintain it in respectful reverence of the lives so brutally taken there, or do they want to turn it into a shrine of anti-Mormon hate speech and proselyting?