Deseret News | Church issues apology for massacre

Reader comments
Church issues apology for massacre

274 comments | Read story

Walter | 3:55 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Now that the Church has apologized for something that was done by some members and not by the Church ,perhaps is time for the people and governments of the States where many members of the Church including children and women were murdered and persecuted. Can the media be fair?

Mr. Bean | 3:58 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

The priesthood ban was not racist. It may have been discriminatory but never racist. This is an example of the misuse of our language by the left.

Absurd | 3:59 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

This is absurd. The Deseret News is supplying all the "haters" a forum to hate! I am done with this newspaper! I am shocked at you people. I hope you aren't my neighbors!

Comments continue below

Texas Mormon | 4:08 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

What does this experience teach us about following our leaders? Are those people who did this terrible thing absolved because their leaders directed or wanted them to do it? That's another side of the story that isn't discussed much.

I think that it is most appropriate to try and reconcile relations with other people. If these people harbor ill feelings towards "us" because of people in our past, then we should do what we can to try and reconcile and work out those problems. I think this is Christ-like and needs to be done more often. It is not about blame, or whether it was our generation, it is about healing. And, if these actions will help bring about healing, then so be it.

Now as to following our leaders when they want us to do something, and we won't be held accountable or responsible for, that's a matter for another discussion. That's the lame excuse the Germans used after WWII for doing what their nation's leaders said. Anyway...

Disgruntled | 4:20 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Forget Mountain Meadows, the Church should start apologizing for holding 9:00 Sacrament meeting. Weekend days shouldn't start till noon.

Re: Logan - Rebuttal: Reprise | 4:21 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

I appreciate your patronizing naivete, but my graduate work in Theology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill suggests that I am not misinformed about early Christian history and theology. Indeed, I have spent many hundreds of hours "taking the discussions" from no less than 12 pairs of your naive young friends, only to find them appaulingly misinformed about the Western intellectual tradition in general, and the history of Christianity in particular, not to mention the holy scriptures. As such, I recommend that it is you who would benefit from getting the "truth" from one who knows.

Tea gee | 4:25 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Apology? Donï¿½t think so.

I searched the article (use 'Ctrl F' ï¿½ typed in 'apology') and the only time the word "apology" was used was by the staff writer and the headline writer. I read 'regret' a couple of times, but no 'apology' was offered.

The church PR statement does not use the word apology. So those who don't think the church should be accountable for it's membership, sleep well.

When I apologize to someone I say "I'm sorry, I apologize" or, "I would like to offer an apology". If I told my wife I 'regretted' for making a comment, well - I would started a whole new discussion. (I regret that I did that 'once'!)

I'm sure the church "regrets", racist remarks by BY, banning priesthood to blacks, having to give up earthly polygamy and a few other questionable teachings it eventually changed. But the church won't apologize for them. That would imply the leadership is imperfect. And it is wrong to criticize the leadership. And the reason that it is wrong to criticize the leadership is because the Leaders have said that is wrong to criticize the leadership. Q.E.D.

GM | 4:26 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

To my Catholic friend:
We're all in this together! Think about all the things your church should apologize for!! And it all YOUR fault.

petersneal | 4:27 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Mr. Bean,

Please explain to me how the ban on the priesthood was not racist.

Fredd | 4:27 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

After reading all the hateful comments by supposed LDS faithful attacking anyone and everyone who disagrees with anything to do with you faith, I have lost a lot of respect for LDS people. Why don't you just admit a group of early members committed an atrocity and the "official" institution of the LDS church handled it very badly. No punishment, covering it up, etc. The latter is what the church should apoligize for, not the actual massacre.

Sad History Lesson | 4:32 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

A stark comparison to the World Trade Center event on the date of September 11, 2001. In Utah the religious and civic world blend all to often and the roles that Brigham Young held in 1857 were no exception. Both of these 9/11 events were perpitrated by radical religious zealots, questionably caught-up in their perceptions of religious/church doctrine along with the questionable direction by the religious leaders who were in most cases also the civic leaders. Any religion or civic organization can have zealots. The current Utah situation with Warren Jeffs is another example. What I find interesting is how the term prophet is so loosely used.

Support For Petersneal | 4:33 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

John,

There is a new DVD coming out this month entitled "Blacks in the Scriptures" blacksinthescriptures, that will take you through the scriptures and not only show you where you are wrong, but will highlight the great need for the LDS Church to apologize.

Following that will be a documentary on Black Mormons. In this documentary an LA Reverand quotes President Hinckley's apology to him for the Church's role in slavery and racism in America. You can see the trail of this at untoldstoryofblackmormons .

It is critically important to be kind and be informed.

No pioneer or American ancestors | 4:36 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

To Fredd:

Did you not read any of my posts? Or several others which did not "spew" hatred toward those not Mormon, or those who posted "hateful comments" about the Church, the leadership, the members, their neighbors, the US government, Republicans, Democrats, etc.?????

RE: Mr Bean Tea gee | 4:37 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

To discriminate based upon the color of ones skin is not racism?

I am discriminate about the color of paint I'll put on my bedroom walls.
I discriminate which wine I'll serve with dinner.
But to deny anything to anyone due to their skin color is racism.

Racism is the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior or inferior to members of other races, or in other words, it is a belief or concept that inherent differences between people, in particular those upon which the concept of race is based, significantly influence cultural or individual achievement or potential, and may involve the idea that one's self-identified race or ethnic group or others' race or ethnic group is superior ï¿½ from Wikipedia.

1.a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2.a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races. from Dictinary.com

To: Texas Mormon | 4:37 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

You got it exactly right. Turning your mind over to blind obedience is the dangerous thing here. That is what we must learn from Mountain Meadows. John D. Lee (and all the others) should have taken a stand and said, "NO! I will die first rather than to kill these people!"

To GM | 4:44 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Exactly. And that is what some of the recent holy pontiffs have done, using "modern day revelation"... and Jesus remains the One, Supreme Head of the Church.

kmfp5150 | 4:50 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

If you'll notice, never does he say the word "apologize" he says "We express profound regret" An apology by the lds church would be an admission of guilt. Which is something they would never do. Passing the buck onto others to avoid acceptance of responsibility is their MO. Typical LDS "leadership". Boo hiss!

REMAY | 4:51 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

How about a monument in Arkansas, provided by its citizens, at the spot where vengeful bigots chased down and murdered Parley P. Pratt while local authorities looked the other way, and then did nothing to bring justice to the murderers?

How about a national monument in Carthage, Illinois where Joseph and Hyrum Smith were murdered while in the custody of the government who did nothing to prevent it or prosecute it after the fact? Why don't we have a chapter in the history books about that murder?

How about an apology from the states of Illinois, Missouri, New York, Ohio, etc. for illegally allowing Mormons to be deprived of their liberty, lives and property while doing nothing to uphold their constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion?

Does all this fuss about one isolated incident by some wild-eyed settlers in Southern Utah seem a little one-sided given the complete history of the LDS church?

A Brother In Christ | 4:56 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

I don't know whose thread is whose, but the Catholic is right on. As an LDS for only 3 years now, I am becoming more informed about what I have gotten myself into. I am starting to think that there really was no "Great Apostasy" (as Talmage tried to tell us). Instead, the only "apostasy" was when Joseph Smith apostatized from Christianity by rejecting the Christian tradition and calling it an "abomination."

Frank | 4:58 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

It is apparent that there are a lot of people who seem to be sticking their nose into business that is really none of their concern. This issue is between the decendants of the victims and those who have made the appology. Let it be.

As a tax payer why burden me with the care of this monument? As I view the grounds of the LDS church, it appears this sight will be better cared for under their care, then what the government would ever have an interest in doing.

DEPRESSED IN LA | 5:01 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

YOU ALL ARE SO HATEFUL WITH YOUR COMMENTS. WHY DO WE ALWAYS HAVE TO TRY AND "OUT NASTY" EACH OTHER IN OUR COMMENTS? MANY OF THE COMMENTS ARE DESIGNED JUST TO EGG PEOPLE ON...AND THEY SURELY DO... SOMEONE ALWAYS HAS TO RISE TO THE BAIT. MANY OF YOU ARE - CLAIMING TO BE SO EDUCATED - ARE NOT EVEN STICKING TO THE ARTICLE SUBJECT. WHO CARES ABOUT ANY OF THIS. IT IS DONE AND GONE. IT IS UP TO EACH ONE OF US AND HOW WE DEAL WITH EACH OTHER THAT MATTERS NOW. FROM WHAT I HAVE READ TODAY, IT SOUNDS LIKE ALL WE DO IS LOOK FOR SOMEONE OR SOMETHING TO HATE! DON'T WE HAVE ENOUGH PROBLEMS WITHOUT GOING OUT TRYING TO CREATE THEM? THIS IS SO DEPRESSING! DIDN'T WE LEARN ANYTHING FROM 9/11? I DON'T THINK I WILL READ THE COMMENTS ANYMORE

Newby | 5:08 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Let me see if I understand the posts so far: An apology for MMM is important because it shows that Mormon leaders make mistakes. This is an important point because it runs contrary to the claims of those very same Mormon leaders to being the one, true, only representatives for God on the planet. And the priesthood thing further suggests that perhaps these claims to divine authority are empty. Is there any way for the Mormon leaders to convince us that they really have "divine" authority?

Iwasthinking | 5:12 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

What I learned from 9/11 is that religion can get you to do some crazy immoral things, like fly a plane through a skyscraper and also excute men, women, and children out on the prarie.

To All | 5:16 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Just because you disagree with what someone else has written does not mean that their comments are "hateful." Now putting a bullet through a child's head after they have surrendered under flag of truce, all "in the name of God," may not have felt "hateful" at the time by those zealots who were doing it, but it surely was! Just as hijacking an airliner filled with innocent passengers and crashing it into the Towers may have felt like righteous bliss to those zealots who did it, but normal human moral judgment has no problem calling that "hateful." Posting contrasting points of view on a silly newspaper blog - that is not hateful.

petersneal | 5:31 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

RE: Newby,

I agree.

I've been an active member all my life and probably will remain so until I die. I'm pretty sure the general membership's attitude is going to change regarding the leadership claim on absolute divine authority. More and more members are becoming familiar with the church's actual history--both good and bad things--instead of just relying on what the missionary discussions and popular LDS historical fiction teaches. Sure, the church teaches good things, and I believe that a portion of what they teach is directly from God. However, given the huge mistakes that the leadership has made in the past, like the priesthood ban, MMM, etc., no one can honestly take everything the leadership says to be God's absolute will.

D.G. | 5:33 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Iwasthinking:
Your posts are thoughtful. I mean it. We all know that the survivors write the history. So if we are good Christians, and we know we are here on this land and prospering - at least in part because of injustices committed against another people by our ancestors, that is an uncomfortable thing to be honest with oneself about. What can be done about it? How exactly can such an injustice be justified without further victimizing those of us who were bequeathed this tainted inheritance through not fault of our own!? I don't know about you, but I didn't ask to be born. If I remember right, I came kicking and screaming into this world, forced into existence "against my will." As such, we are all here "against our wills" and have this ethical responsibility to discover the injustices and to set them right as well as we are able. Beyond that, well, I guess that is what the Christian doctrine of "atonement" is supposed to cover... But exactly how does that work? How does Christ's death make things right for those descendants of the Fancher party who never arrived in California, and those children who were never born because so many 14-year-old girls and boys were killed and never had a chance to marry, have families of their own, and enjoy this thing we call life?

Bill O | 5:35 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

I'm sorry Trout-P is finding it so hard to fit in, even after 10 years. We moved to St. George from California three years ago. My wife and I have been presidents of organizations within the LDS church, and in an organization outside the church. We have associations with Habitat for Humanity, the Chamber of Commerce, the St. George Musical Theater, the Celebrity Concert Series, Heart Walk Foundation and other organizations. We appreciate the warm reception we have received throughout the community.

Randy Jordan | 5:44 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

There have been many comments here stating that the LDS Church as an institution was not responsible for the MMM. Such remarks are merely a testament to how well the church's leaders and its apologists have covered up and misrepresented the facts ever since the incident occurred. The truth is that the LDS church and its policies were 100% responsible for the MMM. Its doctrines of "blood atonement" and its temple endowment oath to "avenge the blood of the prophets" were prime causes. I recommend reading the historical documentation at

http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon472.htm

to see exactly what Brigham Young and his associates said and did before, during, and after the incident.

As for the alleged Mormon "persecutions" in Missouri: the Mormons themselves were entirely responsible for the violence against them. Most respondents to this article are obviously faithful, loyal Mormons, and have only heard the church's side of the story. To get a more balanced view, I recommend reading "The 1838 Mormon War in Missouri" by Stephen LeSeuer.

The Haun's Mill massacre, while tragic, was not an act of "religious persecution" committed by Missouri officials, but rather was an unauthorized act of retaliation for looting and burning of non-Mormon settlements by Mormon "Danites." Local non-Mormons were told by Mormon dissenters that they were about to be attacked again, and the Missourians improperly attacked the Haun's Mill settlement as a "pre-emptive strike."

For those readers who question this view, I suggest that you study the subject from secular scholars such as LeSeuer before stating your opinions.

Stewardship of MMM | 5:44 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

The ceremony was nice, the weather perfect! While both sides were respectful, issues of closure remain for some decendents. Offering land stewardship or allowing the Dept of the Interior to nuetrally maintain the site would be nothing less than generous.

Yesterday I battled here, then drove the 400 miles here to honor those who lost their lives. Closure is over half way and the church has taken that first step, one more in allowing the decendents the dignity to maintain the monument would demonstrate the full good will that is needed.

After the ceremony I went to the county court house and met with news crews covering the Jeffs trial. Armed with 400 of Jeffs audio cassettes, another issue is presented for closure. The debates in here convinced me to make the drive to set several issues straight.

Did others here attend? Shannon Novak of the 1999 dig attended and Burr Fancher now 80 years old did a fine job of speaking to the hearts and minds of those attending. I even joined as a member of MMMF to keep abreast of new issues.

MIB

carver | 5:45 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

line up 1000 successful people and i will show you 1000 people with a pro-active attitude.the opposite of pro-active is re-active. re(in the past)active traits lead to failure. i think i will go forward!

Logan | 5:46 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Mormon church=Racist, liars, bigots, cult!

Some Young Guy | 5:48 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Vegas Ed: Almost all of the history points to Brigham Young telling them to let the group go through peacefully.

What it should read: The history that comes out of Church Headquarters points to Brigham Young telling them to let the group go through peacefully.

Fixed it for ya.

Anonymous | 5:56 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

To Mr. "Get Over It...."

You said: "Enjoy this country or GET OUT!!!"

Wow... that's a very Christ-like statement. Did you learn to act like that at Church?

While you're at it, you should head over to Iraq so you can fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here. They hate our freedom you know.

My Heart Settled | 6:41 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Several years ago I joined the LDS Church and up until I learned about the MMM, I was content... I asked the local bishop to help me understand and learn about the MMM and it was brushed off. I asked another,'It was bushed off, and so on... Ultimately I did my research and learned of the 150 year old MMM and the questions have followed me up until now.

I and sincerely glad to see that the LDS has stood up and accepted responsibility; even though all of the victim and their families are long gone, it makes me feel as though a huge burden has been lifted from the 'whole of the LDS' - Remember folks, even though its long over and no one is left, the whole experience does affect what the general population thinks of the LDS in general. Its honorable for the LDS to step up and take responsibility; it shows they truly care.

South African Mormon | 6:49 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Growing up outside of the USA (and the LDS Church) I find the Mountain Meadows Massacre ongoing issue for various complaint groups quite puzzling. I don't understand why fingers are pointed at "The Church" at large when this action was committed by a group of confused, scared, faithless few who took the law into their own hands. Brigham Young had no hand in this massacre (his communications are well documented) and history shows that the Mormon people over the history of the church have never repeated anything like this act - ever. This was 'freak' event that was the result of a few shaky pioneers reacting poorly to the threat of unjust invasion of their homeland.
It's a great lesson in the importance of following process and correct lines of authority to preserve the common good. When people choose to take the law into their own hands, anarchy prevails, and evil triumphs.

Brian | 6:53 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Can an anti-mormon/jack mormon/non-mormon explain why they are so infatuated with commenting on this story? Really, I am extremely curious. Are you just a conspiricy theory junkie? Are you offended because you don't/can't/wont go to church any more. Is it your moral obligation to save all mormons from the brainwashing? Just wondering. Thanks.

Jewmon | 6:54 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Why would the Mormon Church apologize? This was a Holy Massacre, just like when the Israelites massacred the Canaanites, with G_d's blessing, in the book of Exodus. Mormons even tore down the monument erected for the victims... twice! Nice!

Why apologize for doing what G_d wants you to do? G_d commands death and destruction for his enemies! This was a holy jihad that Brigham Young ordered. Praise Elohim!

Christopher | 7:00 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Interesting that every review of September Dawn was negative and accused the producers of " hateful bigotry" and gross error of facts, but those who continue live in the past and won't let their feelings change with the sincere efforts to bring a fitting memorial to this horrific event LOVED THE FILM!!

fromupnorth | 7:00 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Trout...get over it. It is that way all over the country. The long time multi generation resident families are extensive and they are used to marying each other and loooking to each other for solutions and direction. Newcomers, like my wife and I who arrived in Ivins 16 years ago have all kinds of great connections here. Get involved in the system and things will change for you. Sure, things are different in Dixie, and in Vernal. That is called geography. It is everywhere to be found. Tragic events, like MMM are still going on all over the world on a large scale because the Christlike lifestyle has not been assimilated.

RE: Logan | 7:01 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

The Catholic church was one of several small sects of Christian Judaism that survived afer the crucifiction of Jesus. It became the most powerful one of these sects around 400AD when the Roman emperor realized how much power he could gain by joining one of the sects and controlling it vs. spending resources trying to eliminate the very popular movement. So he joined (and controlled) the Catholic sect. The Catholic priests became ultra powerful with the emperor's support and destroyed the other Christian sects.

It was an impressive WIN-WIN-WIN situation.
WIN #1: Emperor in control of church (win for him).
WIN #2: Catholic church in control of most if not all saints(win for Catholic church).
WIN #3: Saints don't have to burn precious energy by thinking about moral issues because the church makes the moral decisions for them and ensures passage to heaven for the obedient ones who also give 10% (or whatever) of their resources to the church(win for the fools).

Religion is BIG business, money, and power. But only because of the fools on the bottom who follow blindly and continue to follow and pay 10% for the eternal 7 wives and mansions in heavan.

Not from Utah | 7:08 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

It is so hard to believe the hatred I hear in these comments, but then being from the DC area, I hear it every day in the politics. For someone to believe that all LDS are republicans need to come here and find out that is not the case. There are a lot Democrats in the area, and all are welcomed, no matter political views, because the teachings are of moral and family unity. About MMM, I am so sad it happened, but will not try to put blame on anyone, since we were not there. Same as far as the persecution that took place in Missouri and other locations. It happened, it is a part of history that we hopefully all can learn from. Let's move forward from here as one.

Newby | 7:09 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

petersneal,
I sense in you a kindred spirit. I hope you are right about your prognistications regarding the "enlightenment" of the LDS membership. How the LDS leaders respond to this "enlightenment" will be a true watershed for the Mormon faith. If they try to "flex their authoritarian muscles" and "raise the bar" to maintain control, chances are very good that they will become increasingly irrelevant to the mass of thinking, educated, technologically savvy members and prostelytes, don't you think? - something of a "flat-earth society"? But by embracing the truth of a rough-hewn history, and guiding the organization and its resources, the leadership may just help to redeem many valuable functions of a powerful and wealthy organization. Only in this way can they remain relevant to real, living, everyday human beings.

Bedohav | 7:10 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Thank you Randy for that well stated post. I recommend that all here partake of it.

C.G. | 7:12 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

How about an apology from the British for the Revolutionary War?

How about an apology from the South for the Civil War?

How about an apology from the Catholic Church for killing so many Protestants?

How about an apology from Egypt for enslaving the Jews?

How about an apology from the Jews for killing Jesus Christ?

How about an apology from someone for the Hauns Mill Masacre?

How about an apology from the Muslims for 9/11?

It's not going to stop bigotry, hatred, jealousy, & etc. What's the point? To make somebody feel better?

I agree with Kent Francis (11:57am). When you get the United States to apologize for underwriting/endorsing what happened to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints over 150 years ago (Freedom of Religion?) then you'll get to the real route cause of the whole fiasco of the MMM. You won't get that anymore than you'll get any other of the above apologies.

Sydney Mormon | 7:17 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

To South African Mormon:

No, I'm afraid you've gotten it all back-to-front. This is a lesson in the importance of NOT blindly following process and correct lines of authority. Your characterization of the MMM is absurdly simpleminded and naive.

JusThinkin | 7:19 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Well now that LDS, Inc has expressed "profound regret"...how about turning the remains of the victims over for forensic analysis by an independent agency?

Better yet...how about turning the remains over to the families....

I wonder how the families of 9/11 victims would feel if an Islamic group had control of the remains of their dead loved ones and wouldn't turn them over to the families?

Plato | 7:19 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

I think everyone here can agree that the events of both past and present are often debated to the point in which the real truth, or even what correct action should taken, are misconstrued and confused into an unsolvable dilemma, which we as a society or community may never find an "all-pleasing" solution or explanation to.
I would simply ask all, as fellow members of the human race, to put aside the differences. Whether you be Christian, Atheist, Buddhist, Muslim, Taoist, black or white, rich of poor just consider the fact that deep down we are ALL human. Hateful and biting words will do nothing for the memories of those lost or involved in this 150 year old tragedy. I believe if we were to meet any of these people (mormon and settlers both) they might ask us to simply respect their memories and stop enacting the same hate and predjudice that existed during their time.

FD | 7:22 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

As I have read what many of you have written in regards to the LDS Churches apology given by Elder Eyring I find it interesting that some of you could not recognize an apology if it hit you in the head. You can only see that it's another avenue for you to rip into the LDS church. I know that when you are finding fault with someone or in this case the LDS church you are so self consumed that you are not growing into the person you could become.Why don't you turn your energy into something positive and worth while.

Please, people... | 7:35 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Please be nicer. Good people need their voices heard in the world today. Don't scare each other off with meaness. We need to listen to each other and not get defensive. It doesn't do any good to be defensive. If somebody is bashing on LDS, it's probably because they have had a bad experience or two...and they do happen. Telling them to go away is not going to help anything. It's okay to explain yourself or religion. But do it in a kind and informational manner.

Howard | 7:44 p.m. Sept. 11, 2007

Randy Jordan, look at youself in the mirror. Behold, a 21st century living breathing religious bigot. How does it feel to breathe in and breathe out, over and over knowing you are a religious bigot. And in the 21st century.

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.