Speaker says militia leader betrayed Joseph Smith

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • American Scholar
    Feb. 16, 2010 7:30 a.m.

    The truth will win!

    The new historical documents tell the truth George M. Hinkle wanted to profit from the death of Joseph Smith. This was blatant corruption by George M. Hinkle.

    Sadly, “Anonymous” doesn’t want to consider or does not know how to look at the historical documents that Jeff Walker cited in this article.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 15, 2010 10:52 a.m.

    I consider the militia leader's action to be most patriotic and worthy of the Congressional Medal of Honor. Exposing fraud anywhere should be rewarded.

  • spudmom
    Feb. 15, 2010 6:57 a.m.

    Similar, though not violent, response in Sarah Palin's numerous ethics complaints against her while Governor of Alaska. Some people just want to destroy another person's character because of what they stand for.

  • call me Jim
    Feb. 15, 2010 6:14 a.m.

    Anti mormons post 4 of the first 9 comments. Unreal. I wonder if there is pay in being an anti mormon.

    Actually mainstream christianity is the only religion out there with a basis of anti this or that. You talk to a mainstream christian (baptist, lutheran, protestant,etc) about his religion and its wrapped up in one sentence. But all of them think they are experts in every other religion, oh they go on and on about why Mormons, Catholics, Muslims, Budhist, Jehovah Witness are all wrong. They always know the "secrets" of those religions and claim to know more about them than the people living those religions. Thus I refer to all mainstream christians as antis since that is the basis of their religion.

  • Witness
    Feb. 15, 2010 1:48 a.m.

    If any here have referred to non-LDS as anti-LDS, then let me apologize on their behalf and mine for our ignorance. Yes, Jan Snipps, is Methodist, but I love her writings about our faith, she brings out the light on very many important points in LDS Church history, and I consider her a friend of the Church, not an enemy. If one truly has a solid testimony of the validity of this Work, they have no need to fear the rantings of anyone, anti- or otherwise. The Gospel is true, it will continue to roll forth to fill the Earth. We have nothing to fear but our own doubts, and we should always rely on our Heavenly Father and keep our trust anchored in His Witness of the Truth of this Work of God. In the Name of Jesus Christ, amen.

  • Anonymous is my name!
    Feb. 14, 2010 2:45 p.m.

    How many people living today face or have faced 200 legal cases? That is an astounding number. Assuming that only 10% had any merit and Joseph still comes out looking like a bad man.

    If the angry mob that exchanged gunfire with him at the time of his death had let him get prosecuted instead of killing him this whole discussion would not even be taking place. Of course, from their point of view, you're better off killing the fox in the henhouse when you have got him in your grasp, if you don't the old fox will just go over the hill to some other henhouse.

  • Jim Bodie
    Feb. 14, 2010 12:27 p.m.

    Never say never. According to Bushman, Joseph was convicted of illegal banking activity (Kirtland Anti-Banking Safety Society, 1838) and fined $1,000. "Rough Stone Rolling", p. 331.

  • Anti?
    Feb. 14, 2010 8:58 a.m.

    "If you're LDS, you believe he was falsely accused. If you're anti-LDS, you probably wonder if there was truth to the accusations."

    Why do Latter-day Saints always refer to someone who is not LDS as "anti-LDS". I am not LDS but I am by no means "anti-LDS". It just means I don't believe in the teachings of your Church. I am no more "anti-LDS" than I am "anti-any religious group". I notice that Mormons usually refer to anyone who disagrees with them as "antis". This is really a very childish approach to criticism. I , for one, am fascinated by Mormon history and not being a member , I am able to view your history unclouded by emotional attachment. Please give those of us who have an interest some credit. I would hardly call Jan Shipps "anti-LDS".

  • oldpuebloguyinWyo
    Feb. 14, 2010 8:48 a.m.

    probably just trying to stir a pot that does not need stirring. history continues to repeat itself.

  • Whats the point
    Feb. 14, 2010 8:14 a.m.

    If you are feared, despised, and hated, its just as well if it had been over 400 times. It’s not relevant to the true facts. Just trumped up charges, no different then what Jesus went through.

  • Carl
    Feb. 14, 2010 5:09 a.m.

    Anonymous needs to do a little reading and then comment. It is always gutsy to use your own name.

  • Re: Anonymous
    Feb. 14, 2010 2:37 a.m.

    From the time of the First Vision, Joseph Smith was hounded nearly without interruption until his death. The harassment came in various forms, from the brutally physical, to persistent anti-Mormon editorializing, to legal proceedings.

    Joseph was constantly being arrested on various trumped-up charges. However, he was never convicted of any of the charges ever made against him - a feat made even more impressive due to the sheer volume.

    Keep in mind that today there are many more protections available to prevent frivolous lawsuits and charges than there were on the frontier of the 1830's and 1840's.

    Of the more than 30 volumes anticipated for the Joseph Smith Papers Project, at least three are planned for legal and business records.

  • What's there to comment on?
    Feb. 14, 2010 12:13 a.m.

    It's well known that Joseph was involved in many legal cases. He was continually accused by those seeking to suppress his religious leadership, arrested, charged, acquitted, and then released. And then the process repeated.

    If you're LDS, you believe he was falsely accused. If you're anti-LDS, you probably wonder if there was truth to the accusations. And such is the debate.

    But I'm not sure what Anonymous would like us to comment on?

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 13, 2010 11:18 p.m.

    200 legal cases??? No comments???