Reader comments
Mountain Meadows landmark plan aims to heal, unite
64 comments | Read story
always another side | 4:59 a.m. March 29, 2008
To the decendent: Don't forget decendent, that there are always two sides
to the story. The saints had every right to protect themselves from people
threatening them, they had just moved away from people burning them out of their
homes and killing them; running them out of the country that was supposed to
protect their rights to worship.
History also showed that members of this wagon train provoked and threatened the mormons, and while it was terrible misjudgement on the part of Lee, church history shows us that the mormons fought back only in self defense on most cases. Sometimes they didn't even do that. It's a trajedy, everyone agrees on this, but when are the fancher families going to take accountability for their wrongs? Along with every other person who has wronged the Mormons? When they do...I'll say "It's about time."
History also showed that members of this wagon train provoked and threatened the mormons, and while it was terrible misjudgement on the part of Lee, church history shows us that the mormons fought back only in self defense on most cases. Sometimes they didn't even do that. It's a trajedy, everyone agrees on this, but when are the fancher families going to take accountability for their wrongs? Along with every other person who has wronged the Mormons? When they do...I'll say "It's about time."
It Has To Be Said | 6:47 a.m. March 29, 2008
What would these same descendants reaction be if the current-day blacks from
Arkansas wanted some kind of "recognition" for their family members
who were lynched in Arkansas?? Many Baptists and persons of other religions in
the South were told from the pulpit that anything a Negro got at the hands of a
white, was coming to him--as all blacks had been cursed by God.
Congratulations to the Mormons for taking the high road. They walk the talk.
Congratulations to the Mormons for taking the high road. They walk the talk.
Comments continue below
RockOn | 8:23 a.m. March 29, 2008
Will this stop the whining? No way. It should, but, whiners keep whining.
Hateful people keep hating. Will the haters leave it alone? Nope. They'll
just find some other nit to pick and something else to witch about. Another
example of Taliban mentality.
Dougway | 8:19 a.m. March 29, 2008
What happened to the 70+ other posts on this story?
interest in mmm | 8:23 a.m. March 29, 2008
I would like to know if any one knows the names of the three surviving children,
who stayed in Utah,any help would be appriciated. I think this is a great
thing happening with this gathering.
don | 8:51 a.m. March 29, 2008
"Locked in a dark closet?" I am not aware of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter Day Saints restricting access to documents (other than normal
document preservation practices).
"Ignored and/or skirted for too long" seems harsh. Perhaps consensus among the descendants groups is important to heal wounds without making "losers" and "winners" from people divergent goals or perspectives.
"Walk their talk" can be perceived as arrogant if there is a lack of consensus as to which way to go. Perhaps there are valid reasons other than a lack of resolve.
While organizations could be said to have no soul, the people that participate do. The word "nation" refers to a people with a common birth. In this sense the descendants of the victims are a nation, and the descendants of the perpetrators are another. I find hope in the promise found in Isaiah 2:4 "And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."
"Ignored and/or skirted for too long" seems harsh. Perhaps consensus among the descendants groups is important to heal wounds without making "losers" and "winners" from people divergent goals or perspectives.
"Walk their talk" can be perceived as arrogant if there is a lack of consensus as to which way to go. Perhaps there are valid reasons other than a lack of resolve.
While organizations could be said to have no soul, the people that participate do. The word "nation" refers to a people with a common birth. In this sense the descendants of the victims are a nation, and the descendants of the perpetrators are another. I find hope in the promise found in Isaiah 2:4 "And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."
Getting to the Bottom | 9:16 a.m. March 29, 2008
I always wondered why Mormons would attack a group of settlers moving through
Utah. This seemed out of character.
While reading BH Roberts History of the LDS Church, I came across an account that told of their motivations.
Settlers from back east (Arkansas) were making their way through Utah. In their travels they poisoned several watering holes which killed several Indians. They also boasted to Mormons along the way that they participated in killing, raping and torturing Mormons back in Missouri, many of these Mormons lost loved ones and close friends in these incidents.
As a result, Mormons and Indians got together and committed the killings.
This was wrong for the Mormons to do this. These people should have been arrested and tried. It was not wrong for the Indians to do this, for this was their law that people who do this type of thing should be attacked and killed.
It has been suggested in one post that these settlers were too young to have participated in the attrosities in Missouri. Is so, then these settlers are innocent of what they claimed, or perhaps most of them were too young and some weren't. A trial should have happened.
While reading BH Roberts History of the LDS Church, I came across an account that told of their motivations.
Settlers from back east (Arkansas) were making their way through Utah. In their travels they poisoned several watering holes which killed several Indians. They also boasted to Mormons along the way that they participated in killing, raping and torturing Mormons back in Missouri, many of these Mormons lost loved ones and close friends in these incidents.
As a result, Mormons and Indians got together and committed the killings.
This was wrong for the Mormons to do this. These people should have been arrested and tried. It was not wrong for the Indians to do this, for this was their law that people who do this type of thing should be attacked and killed.
It has been suggested in one post that these settlers were too young to have participated in the attrosities in Missouri. Is so, then these settlers are innocent of what they claimed, or perhaps most of them were too young and some weren't. A trial should have happened.
shameful | 9:26 a.m. March 29, 2008
Will anyone ever hold Brigham Young accountable? Will you guys ever quit coving
for him?
The Third Side | 9:27 a.m. March 29, 2008
I am of Piute descent, know my tribal stories, have lived in the area, seen it,
felt it. Wondered ...we are the third side effected by this historical misgiving
and once again..the native is downplayed and given little quater on who else was
wronged. Then I understand because Utah tried very hard to terminate my tribe
and was the last to recognize us Indians as citizens until well after I had
served in the armed forces..1954. Hopefully this will be an historicll
traidition also which will be handed down in a good way...so that history and
those involved with the modern day power struggles that be learn from it because
that attitude ..wheter paranoid , superior or unrighteous dominion migth not
hinder the progress other people make for their own people. I wouldn't say
I'm yet ready to lay down my sword in righteousness but this is a good
start. It is a way to raise a people and then hopefully they too can take a good
look around and see how they might better the treatment of the many
"nations" that are dealt with rigth here in Utah--not deseret as we do
watch who walks the walk!
Ralph | 10:02 a.m. March 29, 2008
This and other similar problems will persist for years to come until utah
graduates from a mormon state to a total intergrated union state.
Garth | 10:11 a.m. March 29, 2008
Shameful -
If you can produce proof that Brigham Young knew of or ordered this, rather than speculation on your part, then perhaps there will be a reason to hold him accountable.
And Ralph, Utah is only considered a Mormon state by non-Mormons who live in Utah. Everywhere else it is considered a "total intergrated" state - whatever that is.
If you can produce proof that Brigham Young knew of or ordered this, rather than speculation on your part, then perhaps there will be a reason to hold him accountable.
And Ralph, Utah is only considered a Mormon state by non-Mormons who live in Utah. Everywhere else it is considered a "total intergrated" state - whatever that is.
Karen | 10:10 a.m. March 29, 2008
Perhaps descendants of the perpetrators need to have a foundation of some kind
so they can all come together, so they can heal too from this tragedy. They have
been left out in the cold and scorned for there ancestors misdeeds. After all
they must hurt in ways none of can comprehend and need some reassurances as
well. I never here anything about these people. Who are these members of the
church in the thousands, and where are they? Does anyone know. I cannot believe
how one sided you people are. I have a daughter who joined the Mormons, but she
hasn't convinced me to join as of yet. I think there are too many cover-ups
in the church...And I think Brigham Young if he were here would hopefully
apologize for his people and for himself and his involvement if he were 1/2 the
hero you people say he is.
Frank | 10:27 a.m. March 29, 2008
Hey Garth! Is there any absolute proof on anyone of those pioneers who some have
claim to have been participating perpetrators? Are there pictures diaries etc?
Does anyone visually know what all these pioneers were doing out there that day?
Did you see it? Does anyone know if the group of Ark's took the first shot
with a hidden gun? Who knows? You don't know and either do I. My guess is
that there was more going on than what has been revealed to history. Perhaps
Brigham Young was afraid the church would fall apart so he had no choice but to
cover his tracts as someone else has said on here. People still cover for him. I
agree that is shamefully sad.
Deflection | 10:47 a.m. March 29, 2008
Is good! The Shadow knows..just follow your nose! It stinks!
Re: shameful | 11:18 a.m. March 29, 2008
Brigham Young doesn't need "coving"-for (I assume you mean
covering). There is not one shred of evidence that he had anything to do with
it!
I know people who have spent their whole lives hunting for one scrap of evidence to support the template they want history to fit: that it's all Brigham's fault. It may make for an interesting narrative for some, but it's not history.
If you want to spend your life on the same snipe-hunt, go right ahead.
I know people who have spent their whole lives hunting for one scrap of evidence to support the template they want history to fit: that it's all Brigham's fault. It may make for an interesting narrative for some, but it's not history.
If you want to spend your life on the same snipe-hunt, go right ahead.
Ralph | 11:20 a.m. March 29, 2008
During the time of the MMM there was nothing that went on in Deseret by the
mormons that did not have the over sight or consent of Brigham Young, he was
king of his day. No bishop or other mormon leader would dare take such a bold
action as MMM with out notice to Brigham Young.
Come clean MORMONS | 11:38 a.m. March 29, 2008
Re Shameful!
You must be one of Brigham Young's descendants. All Brigmanites cover for him. Also, there is no shred of evidence that anyone who was accused actually did the shootings. However, this large group of religious men didn't just decide one day to go out and kill people. Someone needs to come clean. My guess is that the Arkansas party played a little bit in getting themselves killed as well. Why does everyone want to shove the blame on some and leave the others out?
I agree SHADOW...something stinks!
You must be one of Brigham Young's descendants. All Brigmanites cover for him. Also, there is no shred of evidence that anyone who was accused actually did the shootings. However, this large group of religious men didn't just decide one day to go out and kill people. Someone needs to come clean. My guess is that the Arkansas party played a little bit in getting themselves killed as well. Why does everyone want to shove the blame on some and leave the others out?
I agree SHADOW...something stinks!
wonder | 11:39 a.m. March 29, 2008
Think how members of the LDS Church were being persecuted again at the time
of the MMM, by the Federal Government. Members had again built wonderful
communities after being driven to settle in the Rocky Mountains. To have people
boasting they had killed Joseph Smith panicked members of the Church.
When Brigham Young heard of what happened he was horrified. There were several trials that took place, plus a number of excommunications from the LDS Church (Excommunication is worse than a government trial.)
One of my parents lines are descendants of the early members and early pioneers. I have ancestors that were killed in Illinois. I don't keep bad feelings towards the descendants of those who persecuted my ancestors. Studying history more you will find there are non-members who helped the early pioneers as they were driven from their homes.
The LDS Church is building a nice memorial for something that had been done wrong. We all need to get along.
The MMM isn't the only wrong thing done in the past, there have been many other actions in the world. Does everyone need to keep apologizing for wars, etc.?
Let's learn, get along. Be kind to one another.
When Brigham Young heard of what happened he was horrified. There were several trials that took place, plus a number of excommunications from the LDS Church (Excommunication is worse than a government trial.)
One of my parents lines are descendants of the early members and early pioneers. I have ancestors that were killed in Illinois. I don't keep bad feelings towards the descendants of those who persecuted my ancestors. Studying history more you will find there are non-members who helped the early pioneers as they were driven from their homes.
The LDS Church is building a nice memorial for something that had been done wrong. We all need to get along.
The MMM isn't the only wrong thing done in the past, there have been many other actions in the world. Does everyone need to keep apologizing for wars, etc.?
Let's learn, get along. Be kind to one another.
Blaine | 11:46 a.m. March 29, 2008
The Church is doing the right thing with the MMM site. Now perhaps Arkansas can
do the same thing for the site where Parley P. Pratt was murdered.
Gerald | 11:44 a.m. March 29, 2008
Now I see the justification for slaughtering these 120 travellers. They said bad
things. They were accused of poisioning wells. Huh?
Why do you uneducated Mormons try to justify it? They slaughtered non-combatant men, women and children after promising them safe passage under a flag of truce/peace?
They were the official, local representatives of the LDS Church, and they all claimed to be acting under orders from the highest authorities in the Church.
These are all facts.
How can your religious devition make you so blind to goodness and truth that you would try to distort an obvious mass murder? What, are you Nazis at heart? Is that what the spirit of the Mormon Church is today, the spirit of Nazi Germany where the wholesale slaughter of innocent men, women, and children is justified and rationalized?
If your attitudes were not so frightening, one might feel sorry for you. Radical Islamic fundamentalism has nothing on the Mormons of the 21st century!
Why do you uneducated Mormons try to justify it? They slaughtered non-combatant men, women and children after promising them safe passage under a flag of truce/peace?
They were the official, local representatives of the LDS Church, and they all claimed to be acting under orders from the highest authorities in the Church.
These are all facts.
How can your religious devition make you so blind to goodness and truth that you would try to distort an obvious mass murder? What, are you Nazis at heart? Is that what the spirit of the Mormon Church is today, the spirit of Nazi Germany where the wholesale slaughter of innocent men, women, and children is justified and rationalized?
If your attitudes were not so frightening, one might feel sorry for you. Radical Islamic fundamentalism has nothing on the Mormons of the 21st century!
Tom | 11:51 a.m. March 29, 2008
I am a direct descendant of John D. Lee. I would love to know precisely what
happened, but will not know in this life--the re-creation of history is always
imprecise. I do know that the actions there were terrible, grisly, and
horrifying.
I might want to blame someone besides my ancestor, but in all my reading and study on this subject, and it has been considerable, I have never encountered the smallest bit of evidence that Brigham Young knew anything about this until it was too late. He did send a message immediately after he received word that the settlers were in the area, saying "you must not meddle with them..." and sent the message with all possible dispatch. Unfortunately, it had taken 3 days for the messenger to ride the 250 miles to Salt Lake, and 2 1/2 days to ride back with Brigham's response. The message got there too late, two days after the massacre occurred. Those are the facts which have never been contradicted by any others. Those who challenge the LDS Church to "fess up" to Brigham Young's involvement have never provided any proof for them to confess to, so far as has been published.
I might want to blame someone besides my ancestor, but in all my reading and study on this subject, and it has been considerable, I have never encountered the smallest bit of evidence that Brigham Young knew anything about this until it was too late. He did send a message immediately after he received word that the settlers were in the area, saying "you must not meddle with them..." and sent the message with all possible dispatch. Unfortunately, it had taken 3 days for the messenger to ride the 250 miles to Salt Lake, and 2 1/2 days to ride back with Brigham's response. The message got there too late, two days after the massacre occurred. Those are the facts which have never been contradicted by any others. Those who challenge the LDS Church to "fess up" to Brigham Young's involvement have never provided any proof for them to confess to, so far as has been published.
Anonymous | 12:13 p.m. March 29, 2008
What all the Mormon apologists seem to forget is that the local Church leaders
who planned and carried out the massacre all said that they were acting on
orders (or the implicit wishes) of Brigham Young and his other top Church
leaders! In fact, it is a very good point that John D. Lee's participation
in this event is so completely out of character, and can ONLY be explained
coherently if Brigham Young ordered the killings - and that is Lee's dying
testimony!
sNIPE HUNTER | 12:08 p.m. March 29, 2008
Funny how the grapefine amongst these people is so strong/and kicks who they
don't like in the behind today...almost like a cult ...hard to believe only
one guy took the fall! Kinda like an Oliver North..but it was ZION,,,the poor
kids who died know!
Shawn | 12:09 p.m. March 29, 2008
Why do Mormons believe that Joseph Smith "sealed his testimony with his
blood" and that makes it TRUE, but they dismiss John D. Lee's dying
testimony that he sealed with his blood?
I believe Lee. I think he was acting on orders from Brigham Young, and BY covered his "adopted son's" actions for decades before he could not hide it any more. Then, as Lee testified, Brigham served him up as a scapegoat.
I believe Lee. I think he was acting on orders from Brigham Young, and BY covered his "adopted son's" actions for decades before he could not hide it any more. Then, as Lee testified, Brigham served him up as a scapegoat.
Descendent of MM perpetrator | 12:35 p.m. March 29, 2008
To: always another side: What "History shows.." are you talking about?
Mormon referred history? That's not credible. Even BHRoberts history
book is not seen as a credible source of information. Fact is Mormon settlers
were not the victims - they were the victimizers!
To interest in mmm: There were NO children left in Utah. That's a fabrication, which explains why they or their descendants can't be traced. ALL the children were taken back to Arkansas.
To don: Nice try! You're spewing armchair apologist philosophy and taking the dissociative status of a denialist... which is your right to do so, but fools no one but yourself.
To Getting To The Bottom: BHRoberts book quoting Pratt is the ONLY reference the church has to what caused the MMM. BHRoberts book is not accepted as credible history because it was written with little actual verifiable references to historical assertions he often made. That's why it's not seriously used by church historians, because it's easy to discredit many of Roberts assertions.
Concerning Ralph's comment: Yes! BrighamYoung did know EVERYTHING that happened throughout his realm. The secular AND church history make this very clear. Mormons have always had a very efficient communication network.
To interest in mmm: There were NO children left in Utah. That's a fabrication, which explains why they or their descendants can't be traced. ALL the children were taken back to Arkansas.
To don: Nice try! You're spewing armchair apologist philosophy and taking the dissociative status of a denialist... which is your right to do so, but fools no one but yourself.
To Getting To The Bottom: BHRoberts book quoting Pratt is the ONLY reference the church has to what caused the MMM. BHRoberts book is not accepted as credible history because it was written with little actual verifiable references to historical assertions he often made. That's why it's not seriously used by church historians, because it's easy to discredit many of Roberts assertions.
Concerning Ralph's comment: Yes! BrighamYoung did know EVERYTHING that happened throughout his realm. The secular AND church history make this very clear. Mormons have always had a very efficient communication network.
Apology deserved | 12:43 p.m. March 29, 2008
I think the L D S church owes the Perpetrator's families an apology for
Brigham Young misleading all of them to kill the M-M-M wagon train. It's
only fair. The church needs to quit being one-sided on this event. That includes
Brigham Young's adopted son John D. Lee's Thousand's of
descendants.
Jan | 12:51 p.m. March 29, 2008
I think there would be more active members if the Church if they would come
clean with Brigham Young's mistake. So he made a mistake and was PARANOID!
Do the the descendants have to suffer on account of his negligence and
misleading them?
Descendent of MM perpetrator | 1:00 p.m. March 29, 2008
To: Apology deserved. An apology from the Mrmn Church to Perpetrator's
family descendents would be nice, but that would first require the church to
acknowledge that BrighamYoung knew what was happening, or at the very least that
high up church leaders knew (and may have even sanctioned) what was going to
happen, and that just isn't going to happen. Why?
For one thing, we only have John Lee's assertion that he was acting on BrighamYoung's orders, which was not in writing and in not a single case ever cooberrated by a single other person either verbally or in written journals or the like. That's why in all fairness to a historical context we cannot say with assurity that in fact brighamYoung gave the order for what turned into a massacre, though I believe there is plenty of circumstantial evidence of the times that he did know or strongly suspect what was going on and surely was slow in moving to do anything to stop it. But even that, from a purely historical context, is still conjecture.
What the church is doing by letting the site come under National Monument status may be the closest to an apology made. That's OK.
For one thing, we only have John Lee's assertion that he was acting on BrighamYoung's orders, which was not in writing and in not a single case ever cooberrated by a single other person either verbally or in written journals or the like. That's why in all fairness to a historical context we cannot say with assurity that in fact brighamYoung gave the order for what turned into a massacre, though I believe there is plenty of circumstantial evidence of the times that he did know or strongly suspect what was going on and surely was slow in moving to do anything to stop it. But even that, from a purely historical context, is still conjecture.
What the church is doing by letting the site come under National Monument status may be the closest to an apology made. That's OK.
Chiming In. | 1:26 p.m. March 29, 2008
To all you armchair historians who believe you know so much of Mormon history
consider the following:
I personally have know two church historians, one who worked directly under Hugh P. Nibley. Both have said that they were very careful to reference B.H.Roberts history because it was so poorly supported in many of its assertions.
Both also said that though Parley P. Pratt's writing made for interesting reading, it was good for a Mormon perspective of history, but no serious historian would take it as 'factual' history.
One of these historians knew many of the independent Mormon historians who bravely tackled the MMM case after the John D. Lee family descendants showed incontrovertible evidence that Lee had been scapegoated and didn't deserve what happened to him.
The evidence was presented to the then president of the church, who thereupon had Lee's name reinstated back into the church rolls and his temple work reinstated. In other words, Lee wis vindicated and exonerated. This is what started bringing MMM into the open and started a process of clarification and resolve to the tragedy.
You armchair historians need to stick to your reading and leave the commentaries and conclusions to real historians.
I personally have know two church historians, one who worked directly under Hugh P. Nibley. Both have said that they were very careful to reference B.H.Roberts history because it was so poorly supported in many of its assertions.
Both also said that though Parley P. Pratt's writing made for interesting reading, it was good for a Mormon perspective of history, but no serious historian would take it as 'factual' history.
One of these historians knew many of the independent Mormon historians who bravely tackled the MMM case after the John D. Lee family descendants showed incontrovertible evidence that Lee had been scapegoated and didn't deserve what happened to him.
The evidence was presented to the then president of the church, who thereupon had Lee's name reinstated back into the church rolls and his temple work reinstated. In other words, Lee wis vindicated and exonerated. This is what started bringing MMM into the open and started a process of clarification and resolve to the tragedy.
You armchair historians need to stick to your reading and leave the commentaries and conclusions to real historians.
Ridiculous to keep grudges | 1:37 p.m. March 29, 2008
If I boasted and held grudges about both sides of my family it would dumb. I
would be fighting with myself, over things I had no part of...
Both sides of my family were in Illinois at the same time. My maternal lines were members of the Church and paternal side were not members. Both lived in the area of Nauvoo. Nothing is mentioned by the paternal non-members of the Church, I hope they were ones who HELPED the members who had been persecuted.
It has been 150 years since the MMM. Why do some descendants keep holding grudges about things they had no part of ???
I have ancestors who were killed in wars, persecuted in the Salem Witch Trials, etc. by other ancestors. If I held grudges about these I would be fighting with myself.
silly to keep grudges
Both sides of my family were in Illinois at the same time. My maternal lines were members of the Church and paternal side were not members. Both lived in the area of Nauvoo. Nothing is mentioned by the paternal non-members of the Church, I hope they were ones who HELPED the members who had been persecuted.
It has been 150 years since the MMM. Why do some descendants keep holding grudges about things they had no part of ???
I have ancestors who were killed in wars, persecuted in the Salem Witch Trials, etc. by other ancestors. If I held grudges about these I would be fighting with myself.
silly to keep grudges
Non member History nut | 1:46 p.m. March 29, 2008
I have seen some of the anti websites out there of the Francher group, where
they have men listed as perpetrators who were not. If a man was in the area of
the M. M. Mass., rather he had participated in the killings or not, they say he
had. I believe though there are some copyright infringements there on
photographs as well. i couldn't get copies when I tried from the families.
Nonetheless it is pure dirt and PURE HATRED! and horrible distortion of Mormon
pioneers. It is work of a true heathen. These people do not intend to ever
forgive you Mormons.
So odd | 2:03 p.m. March 29, 2008
So if ...
"The then president of the church, who thereupon had Lee's name reinstated back into the church rolls and his temple work reinstated. In other words, Lee was vindicated and exonerated."
Then who was guilty of the murders in the eyes of the LDS Church .... no one?????
"The then president of the church, who thereupon had Lee's name reinstated back into the church rolls and his temple work reinstated. In other words, Lee was vindicated and exonerated."
Then who was guilty of the murders in the eyes of the LDS Church .... no one?????
Shadow | 2:11 p.m. March 29, 2008
It seems like many of today's mormons believe if you tell a lie long enough
and enough times it will come to be believed and that believe will justify its
existance, and maybe in some cases that may prove true, but I am sure God sees
beyond the vail.
Jason | 2:33 p.m. March 29, 2008
So Odd,
Everyone know Brigham Young instigated the whole event PERIOD! It's just too hard for the church authorities to admit it. However, everyone knows. No one can hide true facts! It is quite obvious.
Everyone know Brigham Young instigated the whole event PERIOD! It's just too hard for the church authorities to admit it. However, everyone knows. No one can hide true facts! It is quite obvious.
Re: Ralph, sNIPE HUNTER, etc. | 2:29 p.m. March 29, 2008
Some evidence, please!
You continue to make blanket assertions (e.g., Brigham Young knew "everything" that happened in Utah territory) and furnish no evidence.
Nobody has furnished any evidence that Brigham Young knew "everything" that went on in Utah territory, much less that he had anything to do with the MMM.
To merely assert that he knew "everything", is not evidence of complicity in anything.
You continue to make blanket assertions (e.g., Brigham Young knew "everything" that happened in Utah territory) and furnish no evidence.
Nobody has furnished any evidence that Brigham Young knew "everything" that went on in Utah territory, much less that he had anything to do with the MMM.
To merely assert that he knew "everything", is not evidence of complicity in anything.
Re: Shadow | 2:53 p.m. March 29, 2008
People are always going to believe the lies of those who have authority over
them. It's that way in any organization. However, most intellectual people
know Brigham Young was the instigator. It's not to hard to figure.
wrz | 2:49 p.m. March 29, 2008
>>Those who challenge the LDS Church to "fess up" to Brigham
Young's involvement have never provided any proof for them to confess to,
so far as has been published.<<
These kind don't need proof. They are content with lies, half truths, and innuendos.
These kind don't need proof. They are content with lies, half truths, and innuendos.
wrz | 3:04 p.m. March 29, 2008
>>This and other similar problems will persist for years to come until
Utah graduates from a Mormon state to a total integrated union state.<<
Ralph, that is truly funny. What are Mormons supposed to do, give up their religion and all of a sudden become Baptists or something?
Ralph, that is truly funny. What are Mormons supposed to do, give up their religion and all of a sudden become Baptists or something?
Brain Washed | 3:13 p.m. March 29, 2008
Ok, Brighamites! You guys have hid all the evidence from everyone, or even
better destroyed what ever you could find just to hide the truth. Shame on you
folks! You're just as guilty as the John D. Lee group of perpetrators! No
religious group without a the leader just go commit murder. Look at Charley
Manson and the power he had over his group of wackos!
wrz | 3:09 p.m. March 29, 2008
>>During the time of the MMM there was nothing that went on in Deseret by
the mormons that did not have the over sight or consent of Brigham Young, he was
king of his day. No bishop or other mormon leader would dare take such a bold
action as MMM with out notice to Brigham Young.<<
You could be right... And Brigham said, "leave them alone."
You could be right... And Brigham said, "leave them alone."
Re: wrz | 3:16 p.m. March 29, 2008
No I don't recommend mormons give up their religion, I think that would be
sad. I think the situation in Utah will take care of itself in time as more
non-mormons move into the state and become active in community and political
affairs then things will start to balance out in a way more representative of
other states. Of course, there is a possiblity since mormons have such large
families that there may never be an equilibrium.
Anonymous | 3:19 p.m. March 29, 2008
To wrz,
What a great idea! I think that would be a perfect solution!
What a great idea! I think that would be a perfect solution!
Re: Jason | 3:23 p.m. March 29, 2008
You have no evidence that Brigham Young instigated the whole event,
"period." And you haven't bothered to furnish any.
So it's not "quite obvious."
For the few who are unconcerned with quality or quantity of evidence and standards of proof, it may not be "hard to figure." But there are those of us who believe in those time-honored traditions. Thus, I am sure that I am not the only onoe who finds your pronouncements unconvincing.
Surely, it's not too much to ask that those who make such self-assured charges offer at least some proof of their claim!?
So far nobody as offered any.
So it's not "quite obvious."
For the few who are unconcerned with quality or quantity of evidence and standards of proof, it may not be "hard to figure." But there are those of us who believe in those time-honored traditions. Thus, I am sure that I am not the only onoe who finds your pronouncements unconvincing.
Surely, it's not too much to ask that those who make such self-assured charges offer at least some proof of their claim!?
So far nobody as offered any.
Anonymous | 3:23 p.m. March 29, 2008
Chiming In. | 1:26 is exactly correct! The facts support it and the actions of
LDS Church Leaders is consistent with this explanation.
Wake up, fellow LDS. If Joseph Smith did more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men, then Brigham Young did more for the destruction and corruption of the truth!
Wake up, fellow LDS. If Joseph Smith did more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men, then Brigham Young did more for the destruction and corruption of the truth!
qwr | 3:31 p.m. March 29, 2008
>>It has been 150 years since the MMM. Why do some descendants keep
holding grudges about things they had no part of ???<<
It's not about the MM Massacre per se. It's about hate for the Mormon Church.
It's not about the MM Massacre per se. It's about hate for the Mormon Church.
fred | 3:29 p.m. March 29, 2008
"Then who was guilty of the murders in the eyes of the LDS Church .... no
one?????"
If you're talking about the death of Parley P Pratt the answer would be "the Arkansans."
If you're talking about the death of Parley P Pratt the answer would be "the Arkansans."
John B | 4:13 p.m. March 29, 2008
well looks like the Church and the victems familys have tried to work things out
now if the members
and non members would leave it alone it might work out but that is not going to happen we all want to think we are right and know all facts,reason,witneses be d---- and we need to rember theres a diferance between figuring and assumeing
and non members would leave it alone it might work out but that is not going to happen we all want to think we are right and know all facts,reason,witneses be d---- and we need to rember theres a diferance between figuring and assumeing
Descendent of MM perpetrator | 4:07 p.m. March 29, 2008
Ok folks, we've all had our say ad infintum and ad nauseum about all the
who shot who and who started it all and who's responsible. Fact are:
Early Utah pioneer/settler history is rife with white wash and scrubbing. Remember, Utah Territory was a completely closed kingdom for about ten years. A lot happened that is either off the records or have been altered and edited in not to dissimilar fashion to the European monks editing and re-writing scripture and their own church's history. As to exact and truthful facts for the time we may never know, and it was obviously intended to be that way from the beginning. Sad as that is that is one fact we can all agree on.
Therefore, let's give the Mormon church a break for just a day and at least praise them for doing something that just a year ago they said they would absolutely not do. Praise then for being considerate, thoughtful and willing to change their mind on this one, no matter the motive. It's a good day for resolve and healing on all sides of the issue.
Again, thank you Mormon church for coming through this time. THANK YOU!
Early Utah pioneer/settler history is rife with white wash and scrubbing. Remember, Utah Territory was a completely closed kingdom for about ten years. A lot happened that is either off the records or have been altered and edited in not to dissimilar fashion to the European monks editing and re-writing scripture and their own church's history. As to exact and truthful facts for the time we may never know, and it was obviously intended to be that way from the beginning. Sad as that is that is one fact we can all agree on.
Therefore, let's give the Mormon church a break for just a day and at least praise them for doing something that just a year ago they said they would absolutely not do. Praise then for being considerate, thoughtful and willing to change their mind on this one, no matter the motive. It's a good day for resolve and healing on all sides of the issue.
Again, thank you Mormon church for coming through this time. THANK YOU!
Enough already! | 4:32 p.m. March 29, 2008
Mormons should demand a national shrine at the site of the Haun's Mill
massacre. Then they should sue the states of Missouri and Illinois for
illegally driving them from their states. My relatives were involved in all of
these illegal acts and I should be outraged and demand justice, albeit 100 years
later. Will this nonsense ever end? It was a long time ago, and people died,
justly or otherwise. No one now living did it. Basically, it was people tired
and scared of being pushed around again. This nonsense must make the
"victims' families" feel so self important that they can't
let it go.
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.
Beth Hall, Associated Press
LDS historian Richard Turley, left, Elder Marlin K. Jensen and Patty Norris of Mountain Meadows Massacre descendants group discuss landmark status.
- Stocks rise following jobless news 12:54 p.m.
- Cache woman still critical after crash 12:09 p.m.
- Crews working to free man in cave 12:03 p.m.
- Utes fall to Seattle U. at home 11:56 a.m.
- Quinn backs embattled Weis 11:54 a.m.
- 7 charged in Mumbai attacks 11:38 a.m.
- Energy prices rise despite supply 11:27 a.m.
- Toyota to replace 4M gas pedals 11:23 a.m.
- Lampropoulos in Senate race 11:19 a.m.
- Fed tightens conflict of interest rules 11:18 a.m.
- Witness describes '99 killing
- Donny and Kym dance to victory
- Utah, BYU are top choices for bowls
- Howard made the rivalry a rivalry
- Cougars cruise past Southern
- BYU would like friendlier rivalry
- Mitchell lawyers lose motion to leave
- Loyal to Cougarettes, Crimson Line
- Police increase presence at Skyline
- Protests against Phoenix LDS temple
- BYU would like friendlier rivalry
252 - Glenn Beck to enter politics?225
- RSL wins MLS Cup on penalty kicks202
- Protests against Phoenix LDS temple199
- Bronco, Kyle rubber match138
- BYU records with win133
- Letters: Rushing to judge Palin126
- Hall, Johnson matchup key102
- 4A: Timpview wins 4th in 4 years95
- Cougars turn focus to dreaded rivals90
Latest comments
To "@ Redshirt | 12:18 p.m. " but covering something that is only a benefit...
He truly did get the Utes back on the road to respectability. I don't think...
Stop bagging on Boylen Cougar fans. We like Boylen. He's a nice guy and he's...
Don't close it, but send the guy a bill for the cost of the rescue!
I was worred about hypothermia, but I read somehwere that it is a thermal...
"Cain 137/215 63.7% 1624 yds 11 tds 5 int 139.4 rate Wynn 57/102 55.9% 793...
I learned from an expert-you....Your cliches are old, who care who posts...
I am supprised that people who believe in GW being man made has never looked...
Maybe it would help if utah would spell "running" correctly on their shirts?
I would not go through those caves unless I was trying to save someone's...
Advertisements
I'm impressed that the Mrmn church has decided to embark on the arduous process of taking open responsibility for healing these wounds in the only way these types of wounds can be healed... by not hiding behind white-wash or ignoring the issue, but by stepping forward and calling it, and allowing it to be called for what it was.
Organizations are a peculiar entity. They have no soul and are accountable to none but themselves, particularly religious ones - especially those who take a literalist view that their history is 'divinely guided.'
Only when things locked in a dark closet finally come out to be aired and laundered can they be made clean. This is a universal metaphor that has been ignored and/or skirted for too long by a church and its people who have too long prided themselves on truth and integrity, but been slow in showing their resolve to 'walk their talk.'
Mr. Turley and Mr. Jensen, you've done a great job. Thank you General Authorities of the LDS church, you've shown that honor and truth still mean something. And thank you for bringing an important piece of honor back to my family tree.