Book confronts LDS tragedy

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Anonymous
    July 5, 2009 2:22 p.m.

    Hi everyone. There is still a difference between something and nothing, but it is purely geometrical and there is nothing behind the geometry. Help me! I can not find sites on the: Dodge dealers auburn wa. I found only this - denver Dodge dealers. Dodge avenger driver falls short of winning first canadian nascar race by anthony fontanelledodge avenger driver mark dilley failed in his bid to win the first nascar race in canada at the dodge dealers. Dodge avenger driver falls short of winning first canadian nascar race by anthony fontanelledodge avenger driver mark dilley failed in his bid to win the first nascar race in canada at the dodge dealers. Waiting for a reply :o, Juliet from Malta.

  • Anonymous
    July 3, 2009 8:01 a.m.

    How are you. Make a decision, even if it's wrong.
    I am from Belgium and know bad English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "If you are a magician or a clown you can get higher priced bookings if you offer a flea circus walt noon."

    :p Thanks in advance. Lilia.

  • jennyz
    Sept. 18, 2008 5:13 p.m.

    Estamos atravesando el tiempo de nuestra existencia terrenal. Solo Dios conoce nuestros anhelos, sueos, miedos y debilidades, y a El daremos cuenta de nuestras acciones en la tierra. Ojala todas las personas podamos tener un espiritu de comprension y perdon para poder llegar limpios de nuevo a su presencia.

  • Richard re:Frank K
    July 27, 2008 1:03 p.m.

    We believe that man should be punished for his own sins and not Adam's transgressions.

    Do you not believe this also? I am just wondering and asking. If your great grandpa killed someone, say a civilian in the south during the Civil War, if he was even in it, hypothetically speaking I guess, and that person was unarmed and even a woman or perhaps even defiled her (I am not trying to say anything like that has happened or that your great grandfather even COULD do such a thing) before killing her, should you and every generation after you need to continue to apologize to her children she may have had that possibly witnessed it from here to eternity?

    It would certainly be a sore thing, indeed, but I doubt that would be expected of you. It seems that as humanity, when it is convenient to have a license to persecute, whether physically or verbally or even politically, we jump at the opportunity for that justification as well as the desire to hang on to anger. Bitterness is something I do not want to live with. It makes life a lot harder to live than it is already withsolittle optimism.

  • Richard
    July 27, 2008 12:59 p.m.

    SLOW S..Julio is right about you, btw. Wiki can be edited by ANYONE who participates with it. I believe , personally, that over several million did die but the exact numbers will be lost forever because the Nazis did not care to keep a record of the numbers or names they put into the gas chambers and then incinerated. The sources that put it below a million are from different places, likely on the opposite spectrum of the political landscape you now find the Chosen People. If all I did was do a quick Wiki search and call my evidence definitive, I would be doing a great injustice to not only the Jewish people, humanity, and history itself. If you want to know where those resources are, go back to school. I heard them and read them directly from my college history textbook citing the far reaching different sources but did not read them directly, only saw them footnoted and cited in college history text. I may have it still somewhere in my house but after moving, most of us know how things do hget misplaced. Just trust me that there are sources that say differently than Wiki.

  • Anonymous
    July 26, 2008 5:59 p.m.

    If a man claims to be speaking for God, but that man is a fallible human being, how are we supposed to know the difference between when he is speaking for God and when he is not?

  • GC
    July 25, 2008 10:15 a.m.

    Steven... We learn from past mistakes. While the holocaust was horific, many study it because we can learn from it, in hopes that it will never happen again. The same with MMM. Mormons should not hide from the past. And as individuals, we should not be apologetic for the MMM event (I personally did not take part in it, so why should I apologize?). The church leadership probably should, but that's for them to decide.

    Daisy... A man can be a prophet and still be a man. Do you think the ancient prophets were perfect? Just because their fallacies were not written about in detail (like we see with the modern prophets) does not mean they did not have them.

  • Frank K
    July 23, 2008 10:38 p.m.

    Wow wee! You guys are a angry bunch.
    I think the MORMONS owe the Fancher people a personal apology, and the personal apologies should come from each perpetrator descendant. You Mormons owe this to these people big time. I too, agree that the Pope is a man of God for the Catholics. Many religions have men of God in there churches leadership...NOT JUST MORMONS!

  • Re: George
    July 23, 2008 8:37 p.m.

    You go boy! I was going to say it but you beat me to it. Catholics are meek but boy do we carry a big stick when it comes to the truth!

  • George
    July 23, 2008 8:17 p.m.

    Re: To Tommi,

    Your exclusivist, elitist, abhorant attitude is exactly why the world of religions hates the LDS. Your attitude is exactly why Mormon elitists felt they could do no wrong in Southern Utah, so they prayed before executing 120 men, women, and children.

    I testify in the name of God that the Pope IS a man of God as well as a man CALLED of God. So are very many great religious leaders in the world today. How DARE you say what you said! YOU are the one who is NOT of God! YOUR ACTIONS DEMONSTRATE THAT!

  • It's past Time
    July 23, 2008 4:54 p.m.

    I think it would be wel if there was be a public apology to the Fanchers people come from the millions of descendants of the MMM perpetrators.

  • RE: TO Tommi
    July 23, 2008 3:59 p.m.

    The pope is not a man called of God, I follow one prophet and the apostles with him. I follow President Thomas Monson, and the quorom of the twelve apostales. The pope, and any other religious leader in the world was not called of God but of men, and I know, like I said before, That President Monson is man of God, I follow what he says. This great man does produce great works for humanity all the time, I hear about them in news all of the time. The propet I follow is not a man of words, but a man of action. My church has always been a church of action

  • To Tommie
    July 23, 2008 3:24 p.m.

    How do you strattle the fence to follow all the men of God when they all have such different messages, the Pope says one thing, the fundamentlist something different and the mormons are constantly changing what they say. So to you follow what was said a few years ago or what is said now or what is not said but implied. Do the so called men of God really know anymore or less than most others or do they just say what they need to say to do and keep their jobs. I do not see any of them producing great works for humanity, they are mostly men of words; the same words spoken a million times and few times implemented.

    July 23, 2008 3:05 p.m.

    They aren't saying anything worth lying about, they could get a billion more followers if they went and said, "Go ahead and sleep with whoever you want, and go drink!" But they don't. They don't gain anything from telling us what they do.

    I know these men are called of God because I have earnestly prayed about it, and I have recieved, an undeniable, not from me feeling that they are real prophets, scoff at me if you want, but hey, I know what I have felt and I will always follow men of God.

  • To Tommie
    July 23, 2008 2:11 p.m.

    How do you know, if they will lie to get the positions they will certainly lie to keep them, so who are we to believe.

    July 23, 2008 1:36 p.m.

    Does somebody want to tell me what is wrong with following the LDS church leader? what do they teach that is so bad?

    They tell us not to drink alcohol, what is wrong with that?

    They tell us not to have sex, Is that really that bad?

    They tell us not to smoke,

    They tell us not to steal,

    They tell us not kill,

    None of these things will hurt me if I follow them, so stop complaining that our leaders are so evil, there is nothing evil about men called by God. That isn't an argument, this is a fact, these men are called by God.

  • Eddie
    July 23, 2008 12:19 p.m.

    All I can say folks, is that there was something that set these Mormon settlers off to the point of murder. Religious people just don't decide one day to go kill a bunch of people. There is more to this story than what has been told. These Mormon people were influenced by someone more powerful to commit these murders. WHY would they kill families when they had large families of their own? They were religious family people with children of their own. Something isn't making a lot of sense?

  • Chuck-American Fork
    July 23, 2008 12:03 p.m.

    Please give details of every wagon train for the 2 years before and after this event. Review how each group was treated by the Mormons. Can a pattern be established? What changed for this one group?
    Some have referred to threats made by some in this group. Authors often refer to them as "idle threats". Was the Hans Mill Massacre an idle threat? Do we have absolute proof than someone did not threaten to get the United States Army to attack this settlement? Has anyone considered self-preservation as a possibility?
    I will wait to make a personal judgement until I get enough facts and not just statements such as these people had "bright futures" implying the Mormon settlers did not.

  • re: TORY!
    July 23, 2008 12:03 p.m.

    You got it in your the price, dear!

  • Daisy
    July 23, 2008 11:49 a.m.

    To GC The test of a TRUE prophet is they are right 100% of the time as they are getting their revelations from God whom is right 100% of the time as God never lies. So was BY a true prophet? Deosen't look like it.

  • Steven
    July 23, 2008 11:46 a.m.

    Re: GC
    I would like to know what your personal interest is with the MMM. This seems to be quite important to you personally for some reason, and that the LDS church today some how stand accountable for the MMM of a 150 years ago... WHY IS THAT? It's the past and there is no new evidence. And if there were any evidence it would have been destroyed more than a century ago.

  • To: Richard | 8:14 p.m. July 21
    July 23, 2008 11:11 a.m.

    The statement was to prove a point that Mormons merely pick and choose where to apply facts to prove "truths" but, only when the outcome is to their benefit. When writings are plagiarized writing style comes along with it. (Ever heard of Solomon Spalding?) There are also hundreds if not thousands of words that have been added to the English language that are merely made up slang. So your argument holds no merit. There are also many facts that disprove the BOM. Ask yourself this:

    Why have there been thousands of changes in the BOM?

    Why are there so many plants and animals mentioned in the BOM that have been proven to not exist at the time the BOM takes place?

    Why there are over 25 cities mentioned in the BOM that existed at the time of it's writing (1800's) but proven to be named before it's writing?

    How about some evidence from the Hill Cumorah? An arrowhead a sword, anything?

    Kinderhook Bell, Book of Abraham, Bank Fraud, inhabitants on the moon? The list goes on.

    Oh and your three scribes...all left the "church" and or excommunicated. What does that tell you?

    Your post has also helped prove my point.

  • Dave
    July 23, 2008 10:56 a.m.

    I never thought Brigham Young was a true Prophet. However, I just enjoy going to church for the social part of it. I think Brigham Young was definitely involved in M M M disaster. Many believe the church just makes him out as great guy to protect the membership, but we know in our hearts he was just a man.

  • GC
    July 23, 2008 10:42 a.m.

    Whether your LDS or not, the truth should be known and the facts should be accounted for. The events that took place at Mountain Meadows should be researched and revealed completely. There should be no shame for the current members of the faith, only a full understanding of what took place. Those that perpetrated (or contributed to the perpetration of) the events, were human and fully capable of making mistakes (even as big as this one was). And because of that, they will be accountable in the end to the one that matters!

    In the meantime, we learn to move forward by better understanding the past! I will purchase the book because I want to better understand what took place and why.

    BTW... B.Y. was a great prophet. But he was not infallable - he was afterall, still human. His revelation on Blacks and the Priesthood was a mistake. As was the preaching that established the environment (atmosphere) that lead to the MMM tragedy. ... It is possible to be a good member of the Church and still understand that the Leadership is human and capable of making mistakes.

    Do not follow blindly, but lead in truth.

  • Tory
    July 23, 2008 10:16 a.m.

    This article really gets me out of the spirit for the Mormon pioneer day celebration this week. I have 38 Mormon ancestors and "only one" who was also unfortunately involved in the Mountain Meadows Massacre. My family are scattered all over UTAH and mostly all very active LDS. I haven't decided as of yet if I want to buy the book or not?.. when it becomes available. This is a very touchy and sad event for me and my family and we still suffer today as a family over this tragedy. I hope somehow people can learn to forgive and leave this alone, to rest, and with God.

    Have a nice Mormon Pioneer Day. You will be in my thoughts and prayers.

  • LISA B.
    July 23, 2008 9:01 a.m.

    Why do you people keep making an issue out of the MMM? There have been much worse and are NOW much worse tragedies in our world then this one. You LDS need to give this history a rest. What's wrong with you people? Who cares about Brig-Young and his followers fighting with some nonmembers in the wild west. BLA BLA BLA! I will not buy the book!

  • I have a good idea...
    July 23, 2008 12:24 a.m.

    Since these early leaders are past and their fate is certain... you can get baptized for them by proxy and save their butts from the hell sentance they have coming. I doubt it works! read Hebrews 9:27

    People get crazy when you challange their beliefs and chase them out of town!

  • Re: fact
    July 23, 2008 12:08 a.m.

    They also chase cars. Not all dogs are faithful or trustworty and some get rabid!

  • FACT
    July 22, 2008 11:35 p.m.

    HEY,Dogs bark when they see thief coming to the house,they bark when they see something strange or questionable things happen before their eyes.Dogs known to be faithfull and trust-worthy.They will defend their master to the very end,unlike snake who love to deceive,just as what happenned to Adam and Eve.So dogs always better than the snakes.anyway,i am waiting for the book.the whole story is really new to me.I never heard anything like this before.I hope Mormon people dont feel scared by this book,its part of the history that we all must know and learn,nothing more.

  • Stop the hate
    July 22, 2008 11:19 p.m.

    Lately I've been studying the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII and the hateful things that were said and written about them during that time. As I read through the comments posted on this MMM story, I find that attitudes expressed towards Mormons and the LDS Church in some of the comments are not so different from the discriminatory attitudes that existed towards Japanese Americans some 65 years ago. On the other hand, a few of the comments have said the Arkansas emigrants were "asking for it." NOONE deserves what those people got--the massacre was completely unjustifiable.

    Please, as fellow human beings, can we learn from the past and stop the hate?

  • a new record!
    July 22, 2008 10:56 p.m.

    I wonder if there has ever been another crime that has been investigated so many times? This has to be a new record! The "barking dogs" NEED this so very badly to justify their hatred! They invent the controversy that B.Y.ordered the crime and when all the investigations can't find any evidence,the "dogs" bark "cover up, cover up!" If any objective study is done and STILL finds no evidence, the dogs bark,"cover up"! When will it end?

  • Hope it's good...
    July 22, 2008 10:05 p.m.

    I look forward to reading this book. I don't deny the churches ability to produce things that are good, but based on past experience, just things that are truthful. Hope this is not another white-washing, guess we'll have to wait and see.

  • Lesson to be learned..
    July 22, 2008 9:58 p.m.

    "If we want to uproot the causes of religious violence we must uproot the false certainties of religion." --Sam Harris--

  • SlowS
    July 22, 2008 9:35 p.m.

    Fran, now THAT would be worth the price of the book. *laughing*

  • Fran
    July 22, 2008 9:20 p.m.

    Does any body know if this book will tell us who to snob at church if they are related to these LDS perpetrators? I plan too!

  • Beth
    July 22, 2008 9:17 p.m.

    Good on Turley and the truth will be revieled. I think the anti-mormons will hate this book but there is not much more hate int them. Purhaps this will settle them down an bring the truth upon the non-LDS and the haters out there. I would think the anti-mormons have much to reconcile themselves with and this would be a start. Best of wishes. Please anit-mormons if it is not nice and just plain anti, take it somewhere else.


  • PITY
    July 22, 2008 9:16 p.m.

    LDS still has 13 millions members,but has already puff up.If not you try to deceive people with mislead doctrines ,and sending missionaries everywhere ,i think you wont get new members. we are all here not to hate you,but only pity you coz you live under depressions covered in the name of obidient to the leaders of the church.while i think MMM is not important again ,it remind us to not blindly follow orders from the leaders.there is a lesson we all can learn here.

  • SlowS
    July 22, 2008 8:54 p.m.

    Richard- Wikipedia indicates the Jewish people lost 6 million souls in the holocaust. Do you wish to say which sources put the figure as low as one-half of one million? It is estimated by The Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum that 1.1 million Jews were killed at that complex alone. If you get a chance, please post where the half-million figure originated.

  • MMM
    July 22, 2008 8:53 p.m.

    Three M seems such an interesting book.I enjoy reading detective books.the more secret and misterious the better.anyway,the title is like a joke.MMM is about MORMON MEN being suspected of MURDER in the past.i am not anti mormon.its just that the title and the content fits each other.

  • Kalie Ann
    July 22, 2008 8:41 p.m.

    I hope this book gives me a "peace" of mind which I need. I plan to buy it.

  • Leala
    July 22, 2008 8:33 p.m.

    Thirteen million (not billion) is still a hefty package and the caravan does indeed move on. The baptist and catholics are just plain scared of the convert rates and I would chalk many of the anits up to that. I am sad for you whom think you are Christian but have not accepted the true gospel---not very Christian but just plain ANTI!

  • Richard
    July 22, 2008 8:26 p.m.

    Joe Friday: You are going to give me citations, huh? You can ask any farmer up here in Wyoming where I now live about the dangers from a spring and Giardia and people getting sick and dying from it. We use these springs for our water source and they do get contaminated. Salt water in the ocean is not a yarn, it is really there. Try going sometime, you can taste it.

    Shelley: What thje heck are you talking about? I never said that over a hundred people were not slaughtered. Try reading my other posts if you care enough to respond to me. Also, likely you did not read the article. How presumptuous?!? How am I presumptuous? I have read Turley's work before on other things and am familiar with him. That does not make me presumptuous but likely more informed than YOU about the matter. If there are so many sources of information from imperfect beings (i.e. humans) there will be disagreements. Jews claim several million died under Hitler's death camps whereas some other sources claim half million. MMM was well documented by the Mormon families raising th surviving children which are not "found only in the vault."

  • Oh yeah!
    July 22, 2008 7:44 p.m.

    You people need some real history. This is book is probably written to protect the church.

  • re Waiting
    July 22, 2008 7:28 p.m.

    Im also looking forward to reading the book. A lot of articles have already been published from the authors regarding their research, so most of the major conclusions are already available. Unlike previous apologist accounts, it doesnt vilify the Fancher Party and dismisses some common myths that keep popping up. Neither does it delve too deeply into Brighams involvement if there was any at all. Expect it to get into some of the psychological aspects of what the Mormons dealt with at the time.

    From the articles that I read, I'm expecting that it will treat both sides fairly. I dont see why we all need to refrain from commenting, now.

  • Re: moved on.
    July 22, 2008 7:23 p.m.

    Isn't it 13 million (not billion). Anyway, I am hanging on with all my might, mind and strength to the "caravan". But the barking dogs are pretty loud and it makes my ears ring sometimes! Oh well, I guess there are no other "carvans" for them to bark at, is there? Unto whom else shall they bark?

  • MMan
    July 22, 2008 7:16 p.m.

    That's billion with an "M".

  • Moved on!
    July 22, 2008 6:49 p.m.

    You can complain all you want but the caravan is moving on and stronger each day. The thirteen billion members are testiment to that fact! Get a life antis an perhaps investigate the true gospel which God has restored to us!

  • SlowS
    July 22, 2008 6:11 p.m.

    JULIO, thank you. I look forward to reading the book and then comparing it with other accounts and deciding for myself. Bless you for your work.

    July 22, 2008 5:48 p.m.


  • Ned
    July 22, 2008 5:31 p.m.

    I agree with "the truth" You are correct.

  • Waiting
    July 22, 2008 5:12 p.m.

    Perhaps we should comment after everyone has had a chance to read the book, and I hope the world doesn't come to an end when it is released. We don't need another massacre.

  • David
    July 22, 2008 4:39 p.m.

    What does "Under the Banner of Heaven" have to do with the LDS Church? A couple of nuts that were excommunicated from the church, murdered a woman and her baby. I'm ex-lds and have read the book, so I find the comment you made bizarre since one does not relate to the other. If reading a book that has nothing to do with the church made your sister not want the missionaries anymore, you have a strange sister.

  • the truth
    July 22, 2008 4:27 p.m.

    Things do not happen in a vacuum.

    You must put all this in historical context to understand why this happend at all.

    You must understand how defensive the mormons were at that time.

    Having been murdered, raped, their property taken from them, kick out of misssouri with order of extermination, their leader murder, and being kicked out illinoise in the dead of winter.

    Then the threat of war from the federal government against the mormons after running way to utah to live in some land no one thought was any good for anything.

    Was the fancher party poisoning wells. could have.
    Living in a desert, water is vital for life.

    Was the fancher party spying for the federal army? Could have, that is good as any reason to shoot them.

    Did Brigham order this. Very unlikely. Certainly out character. NO other wagon train before was attacked. He never order attacks in missouri or illinoise or anywhere else.

    And there is plenty of evidence the he told people just to let them through, while not giving any help.

    Why wait till cedar city to do anything?

    IT would be very much out character to order this, and there is no precedence.

  • Fred
    July 22, 2008 3:58 p.m.

    There are 284 comments and the book is not even out yet, so we don't even know what it says.

    Should be a great read when it is published next month.

  • Daisy
    July 22, 2008 3:49 p.m.

    I have commented many times on different subjects , and have only had a couple of them posted. If you are not going to post comments, why even have it after storys?

    July 22, 2008 1:39 p.m.

    I think the MMM needs to be forgotten and everybody needs to go home. I say to all people who think it is part of their life....Leave it alone! and don't touch the fish!

  • Nedra
    July 22, 2008 12:30 p.m.

    YEAH! i agree, and who killed Joseph Smith and Hyrum and Parley P Pratt. We want to know? These men should have markers talking about the tragic murders. They were humans.

  • anony
    July 22, 2008 11:46 a.m.

    Why don't non-Mormons spend as much time investigating and discussing the slaughter at Hawn's Mill and the driving of people from Missouri and Illinois?
    "The dogs may bark at our heels but the wagon train moves on."

  • Chain of Command
    July 22, 2008 10:02 a.m.

    There is a perfectly simple lesson to be learned here. If you disagree with what a Church leader is saying or doing, follow the chain of command. If a Stake President, such as Haight was, orders something you feel is wrong, take it to the next level. Take it up with an Area Authority. If what they say seems wrong, take it to the Apostles. If they seem wrong, take it to the First Presidency. If they seem wrong, take it to God directly.

    That is the chain of command. God is at the top. Everyone else in the chain is imperfect and subject to error and corruption. You should never think you are under any obligation to do or say something you do not believe to be right unless God Himself commands you directly. Everyone else is a mediator between you and God. Do not ever let any of them lead you away from God's will.

  • Anonymous
    July 22, 2008 9:30 a.m.

    Why does this have to be a mormon issue? What if it was just a group of men, who happen to be LDS? Why drag the church into this? Why bring it up at all? It's ancient history. Let's get passed this. Ah, the anti's can't. Get a flippin' life!

  • SlowS
    July 22, 2008 8:41 a.m.

    The answer amount of fear and stress justifies murder, so I guess I did answer my own question. Oh, sorry about the delay, but I have a big boy job I had to get up early for to support my family. Gosh yeah, the Fanchers, the Lees and the others certainly have had time to work out that little "tempest in a teapot" in which cold blooded murder was committed on a whole settler's party. Excluding the youngsters of course, they got to watch. I'm sure they have smoothed things over. I'm not fighting battles on line for either side, and I try to get on with my life, including a rewarding career and over three decades of monagamy. You have fun playing. I'm still trying to sort out all the things I was taught growing up in the Church and how the stories keep changing, so forgive me if I'm a little stressed out. I don't have all the answers.

  • SPA
    July 22, 2008 7:59 a.m.

    It's time the Church confronted its past. As a convert to the LDS Church, I have felt that such reform is long overdue! It's almost like a breath of fresh air. It doesn't mean that the Church isn't true but that it is not made up of perfect people. Even Brigham Young and Joeseph Smith weren't perfect, regardless what some may believe! The Church will survive. The Catholic Church has survived and look at the tens of thousands of deaths it has caused, directly indirectly. Protestants who fought with the Catholics don't have a clean record either. Let's face it, the Church (any church) is there to help the weak and those who fall short. Don't point fingers...just learn not to repeat the same errors again. Move on. As for the anti-Mormons who will continue to attack with their venom, just love them and don't invite them to their own Mountain Meadows. As with many things back in history, we weren't there, we don't have the same mentality, and we don't know what we would have done as we sit on our pristine thrones of judgment in 2008.

  • Re: to Kevin
    July 22, 2008 3:15 a.m.

    I identified with what you eloquently expressed on your comment. I am still trying, trying hard. The only reason I have not given up is that I think about what Peter told the Lord when he was discouraged and the Lord asked Peter if he (Peter) was going to walk away too (like so many others did at that time). Peter and (I,now) ask, "Where shall I go, thou has the words of eternal life." Those words have comforted me. Maybe they will you too! Hang in there with me brother. I think we will be very glad we did, someday, if not now! Where else shall we go, indeed?

  • Shelley
    July 22, 2008 1:46 a.m.

    Good heavens, Richard, youre rabid.

    The Church historian evidently doesnt agree with your term paper on MMM and you wont venture to call Turley a liar? How presumptuous.

    Not only that, but I have to wonder if you even read this article. The LDS researchers seem to agree that there were only 17 surviving children (not 30) and 120 victims (how do you get 13 adults from that?).

    Of course, youre entitled to your opinions, but if you feel that you have more accurate information than the historians, then maybe your time is better spent writing your own account of MMM.

  • parowan patriot
    July 22, 2008 1:07 a.m.

    joe blow friday
    that makes 2 witnesses that said them same dummmy

  • Joe Friday
    July 22, 2008 12:21 a.m.

    Well, back to the reruns on the TVLD channel in the retirement home. I thought I might give my report on a 150 year old crime, but I've got my doubts about the jury...

    "Parowan Patriot," the problem with your Grandpa's story is it's the same one John D. Lee told in his diary (an original source). The relevancy is when Proctor Robinson died, not where, which was ten days after the killings took place at Mountain Meadows and a month after any possible contact with the Fancher wagon train. Grandpa was probably repeating what he heard. The emigrants were likely dead before he even fell sick.

    And "Richard," I'm tempted to issue you a couple tickets, one for speeding with the truth on Giardia; look it up (my sister's the doctor in the family, but yes, I am well-educated), and you'll find it's fatal about as often as the common cold. The second ticket is for running a shell game with that spring/stream switcheroo; up here in the mountains of the Rockies a spring comes out of the ground, and there isn't anybody upstream. Not that a running stream would stay poisoned, either. The salt yarn is nonsense.

  • To Kevin
    July 21, 2008 11:45 p.m.

    I tried. I tried hard to live a good LDS life. And much of it was good, and parts of it made me happy. But I didn't fit the mold, and was told repeatedly I didn't fit the mold. Parts of it didn't make me happy. It hurt too much to stay. I believe in a religion of the heart. I take what is good from growing up and into adulthood as a member of the LDS church and I move forward with my life. I am not evil, nor am I anti-mormon. I just don't believe there is a one size fits all approach to life, otherwise we would all be the same.

  • parowan patriot
    July 21, 2008 10:39 p.m.

    joe friday. just the facts. i did not say where robinson died. whatever hamblin said is not pertinent to the facts as written in grandpas journal.grandpa wrote what he knew as it happened at the time, he was dead by the time of the trial etc. he was not involved in the mmm but knew people that were an heard their stories and recorded them. not all the true facts are know to everyone. what did i eat at IHOP this morning? what? you dont know? just cause you dont know dosent mean it didnt happen. think about it. there were many people who had various experiences with the fancher party but just because its not recorded to your satisfation does mean it didnt happen. there are many ways wells springs and waterhole can be poisoned. including some weeds that grow in southern utah. GOD only knows. i am quoting from an original source with no reason to lie. your info has been sifted and spun many times by both sides. which is more believeable.

  • To Anon
    July 21, 2008 10:13 p.m.

    No, I agree that Haun's Mill and Mountain Meadows were both tragedies--anytime someone is needlessly killed it's a tragedy. I simply think it's strange that whenever Mountain Meadows is being discussed someone instantly spouts off about Haun's Mill, as if that is a justification for anything else the Mormons might possibly do in the future. (like "what do you expect them to do--this terrible thing was once done to them.") They seem to exonerate any future actions of the Utah pioneers because, after all, 18 people died at Haun's mill.

  • Kevin
    July 21, 2008 10:09 p.m.

    Antis you can keep it coming but your evil makes testimonies grow stonger. We have and know truth and that is the bottom line. Try living a good LDS life and you might find peace but until then try to chill and just try and take care of your families instead of attacking us. I am sad for you and you hate but I pray for you and the non-members to have a good live until you find the truth of Christ and his Church.

  • RhondaW
    July 21, 2008 10:04 p.m.

    A cousin of mine in Michigan told me last month that she has had missionaries visit her several times. She found the whole religion apealling and was reading one of their books.

    I told her to read "Under the Banner of Heaven."

    She did.

    Then she told them to not come back. Thank God I was able to warn her about the history of the LDS church.

  • Wesley M.
    July 21, 2008 9:57 p.m.

    I agree D. Michael Bass
    The Mormons were the true victims and now their descendants are as well. People who write vicious website with nothing but lies written about the MMM should be sued for trying to ruin families living today. These liars are causing much distress among many innocent Mormon families of today, who may have had an ancestor near the Massacre sight, but no proof they ever killed anyone, accept for some liar who makes up a bunch of ridiculous stories to impress the media on his website. I think the LDS members who are having these lies spread around world wide and across the internet should sue for slander.

  • Re: Chip
    July 21, 2008 9:53 p.m.

    Exactly correct! You nailed this issue! Great points!

  • Anon
    July 21, 2008 9:35 p.m.

    Well yes. Why is it that any time Mountain Meadows Massacre is being discussed where over 120 unarmed victims were shamelessly murdered and all their belongings stolen, that some Mormon has to justify it by saying "Well, 18 Mormons were once killed at Haun's Mill."

    Let me see if I understand you correctly. HM was not an atrocity because only 18 people were murdered. How many people have to be murdered for it to be considered an atrocity or what matter of death do the have to suffer? I did not realize that numbers or circumstances made a difference. You seem to harshly judge the one but gloss over the other when in reality they are both atrocities.

  • Richard once again
    July 21, 2008 9:13 p.m.

    Just finishing up, I hope. Word of mouth passed along information about MMM to descendants in the area but scholars and historians do not take those accounts seriously unless they are written down by an educated source apparently. Ever hear of tribal chiefs who spoke of sacred places inside their villages where sacred objects were kept? Well, of course not. Historians don't like to be caught citing sources like that. You may be right about the kid, or as you say Proctor, hehe. This guy claims to be a descendant of someone who was there and that was what was told him. Norman Rockwell has the gossip down right on his painting where information passed along can change tremendously. From parents to children, the hatred of prejudice can and does get passed. He might be more accurate than the record that is "officially" cited. It may have taken a bit of time for him to die since he was sick for a time. The Paiute chief's son was the victim I knew about. If we really wanted to know, we could ask for exhumations of the bodies which would not liekly bring peace or prevent new questions.

  • Richard
    July 21, 2008 9:06 p.m.

    To Joe Friday:

    You seem to be well spoken if not also fairly educated. I am surprised you do not know of any poisons that could do such damage to livestock. Many claim that Selenium kills. I heard it also helps prevent prostate cancer. Maybe that first part is just spread by men-haters but it is on bill boards here :).

    You can dissolve a salt block in a small amount of water making it unfit for human consumption and likely animal as well. Wehere would one get salt in Utah? I haven't read about the running spring being poisoned but I know they can certainly get Giardia. Ever hear of that? It is a nasty thing to get and can kill you. It happens when fecal matter or even dead animals end up in the soup upstream. That is how one might poison a running stream. I don't particularly like to think about how to cause harm or damage but have to concede that there are absolutely ways. Know what was used before Liquid Plumber? I had a cousin die from drinking Lye. Liquid Plumber is as deadly. Lye was around back then and used for other things besidespipecleaning.

  • D. Michael Bass
    July 21, 2008 9:00 p.m.

    The LDS were the real victims in this situation.

  • Richard
    July 21, 2008 8:55 p.m.

    It looks like someone started a yahoo chat room and asked all ex-mormons, likely not by their own choice or as a result of a very bad choice or more, and any LDS haters to come on down for a good ole fashioned Mormon lynchin' partay. I am trying to just speak what I know and how I have perceived what I learned from it. Most of us here are trying to do that and even share some spiritual enlightenment with others but the bashers are fairly obvious. We understand that anyone can quote scripture and those who have a very sensitive spot in their hearts for the LDS Church would no doubt be particularly adept at sticking where it hurts. Problem is, the bashers and the formers are accusing us of justifying murder which is not what is happening here. Something like this will stir up deep feelings in people and always ends up hurting those who open themselves up to it. I meant to address the deception and say that I found that as well and it was under the guise of surrendering arms and cattle to replace what was lost instead resulting in killing the adults(over13orso).

  • Chip
    July 21, 2008 8:53 p.m.

    I have often wondered about the on going effort to re-hash the MMM. It continues on forever. On the other hand I see no effort to find those who killed, banished, and stole property from the early saints. Who was resonsible for those horrible acts? Who murdered Joseph and Hyrum? What Christian church did they belong to or what government agency ordered it? Doesn't seem to be the same standard does it? Are all Americans guilty because the president of the United States turned a cold shoulder? Why don't we just let it rest?

  • Richard
    July 21, 2008 8:32 p.m.

    Continuing to MMM rumors:

    This is even true in the laws of physics with energy and entropy. If it is published, which they say it is, in order to sell it will have to have "all new only found here, secret documents from a heretofore sealed vault" or it is a complete rehash of everything everyone has said here, basically. We will likely see the view from the SLC perspective at the time but not the one from the Cedar City stake side which has already seen too much light of day to sort out the truths. I learned enough about it to know the fault was with all sides, INCLUDING the Paiutes. There is too much smoke there (no puns intended) and admissions from that time for them to be angered themselves and stirred up to fight. I don't buy for one second that this will be the definitive perfect version of the truth, nor my own current understanding of it to be for that matter.

  • Richard
    July 21, 2008 8:33 p.m.

    You are referring of course, to Isaac C. Haight. You also cite a document that is form 2007 for accuracy concerning this. I do not venture to call Turley or the others liars if their perspective differs from what I have learned in my own investigations concerning Mountain Meadows. I do believe that we will not ever know exactly what happened because of so many peoples' hands in the pot and so many different accounts of it. One thing is certain, the more imperfect humans you have doing something together, the more imperfect it will be.

  • JC
    July 21, 2008 8:25 p.m.

    Wilford Woodruff: May 25, 1861.

    We visited the Mt. Meadows Monument not up at the burial place of 120 persons killed by Indians in 1857. The pile of stones was about twelve feet high but begining to tumble down. A wooden cross is placed on top with the following words, Vengance is mine and I will repay saith the Lord. Pres Young said it should be Vengance is mine and I have taken a little.

  • Shelley
    July 21, 2008 8:17 p.m.

    I have to agree with those who say that we should learn as much truth as we can, and be mindful of the terrible mistakes and all those who suffered needlessly. There are a lot of myths surrounding the MMM and according to the authors, this book will dispel a lot of them. As members, we should not rush to excuse the inexcusable or try to justify it because of the atrocities suffered at Hauns Mill. They were all horrors. Respect all those who died during these horrific events and show compassion for the descendants.

  • Richard
    July 21, 2008 8:14 p.m.

    To "Typical LDS Logic":

    You make no sense for trying to begin with a logical post. You say you want to apply scholarly and educated means to the BoM in order to verify or denounce it? Is that what you mean? It has been done in many ways and many times and forms. One that really stands out is how many different writing styles were found to be in it when it was put under a test (the name of which eludes me, sorry). Not to mention, there were over 170 words added to the English language in it, 540 pages were scribed as dictated, never repeated (if you are willing to believe that the scribes, Oliver, Martin, and Emma) according to those who wrote Joseph's words, translation or writing was done in the total space of about 60 days, and convinve someone to publish it at cost as well as mortgage their farm to pay for the initial printing of it. That is a lot at stake for the time period. Anyway, those are just some "facts" for your "logic" to try and churn out some conclusion.

  • Jedediah Thunder
    July 21, 2008 8:12 p.m.

    I'm noticing that many defenders of the faith here are quick to point out that we need to remember to understand this tragedy in the context of the times, and that LDS leaders are only human, after all, and shouldn't be expected to always make the most wise decisions and choices.
    That being true, would it be okay for me to feel the same way about the current LDS leadership? Would it be okay for me to believe, for example, that their current political involvements in California might possibly be uninspired and misguided?

  • Joe Friday
    July 21, 2008 8:00 p.m.

    "Parowan Patriot's" claim about Proctor Robinson's death isn't supported by the record. He died in Fillmore on September 21, 1857, almost a month after the Fancher train camped at Corn Creek.

    Similarly, there is no known poison whose effects and potency are anywhere near the claims attributed to the mysterious substance carried by the ill-fated Arkansans.

    Jacob Hamblin claimed the emigrants had poisoned a running spring, which is a physical impossibility.

    From earlier articles I've read about the planned Turley volume, these historians suggest that anthrax was the likely cause of the cattle deaths.

    It seems absurd to me to even consider the possibility settlers in Southern Utah wouldn't have known the difference between cattle deaths from disease and those from poison. Anthrax was well enough known and feared in that day and age that it was one of the first vaccines developed by Louis Pasteur.

    The most logical hypothesis is they villified the MMM victims as a rationalization for their own indefensible actions.

  • To HMn @7:07
    July 21, 2008 7:56 p.m.

    "Any MMM critics care to comment on this atrocity committed against the LDS?"

    Well yes. Why is it that any time Mountain Meadows Massacre is being discussed where over 120 unarmed victims were shamelessly murdered and all their belongings stolen, that some Mormon has to justify it by saying "Well, 18 Mormons were once killed at Haun's Mill."

  • Richard
    July 21, 2008 7:49 p.m.

    Oh and I don't really think they meant to necessarily ask Brigham what they should do until the Paiutes got mad. That explains, just let me finish now, in my perception, the most likely possibility as to why they felt they needed counsel from a higher authority. Things got out of hand a lot more quickly than anyone could have imagined or possibly handled. It would have been mostly common sense but then again so would not have bringing the worst sorts of antogonistic anti-Mormons through fringe territory and yes, knocking down fences and angering the natives of both sorts.

  • Richard
    July 21, 2008 7:45 p.m.

    Kyle...How I "erred" yo never addressed and "prediscriminatory bias" is 2 words, not one. Go ask Webster. It is easy to say you are a history professor when you are on a board especially if you are unwilling to or afraid to divulge more than that like what era of history you profess to know so well. Like I have seen with so many different history professors anyway, all have their own OPINIONS why things happened and fill in the holes with guesses which is about all we can do. Like a smart individual said here already, "if you are looking for a bone you really want to be there, you will find it no matter what". You see what you want to see and how you want to see it. I was second-ing the individual who said you should get over yourself, by the way.

    Still working on the "erred" thing. I must have misspelled something seeing as I don't spank English very well. Say, you wouldn't happen to be an English professor, too, would you?

  • Richard
    July 21, 2008 7:39 p.m.

    To the individual who wrote that their name was "To Richard at 5:51": There was a fight for those children I cited legally to send them back to Arkansas and Missouri numbering as I stated. I am no "self proclaimed expert" on anything. I DID go to BYU for 1 year, worked on a Physics degree there before going on a mission, serving the U.S. Army and then going to Georgia Tech where my home is (as if ). If you don't think I can see the differences between the "Bible belt" version of these events and the Church's version, you are absolutely naive. Im not name calling here but you havent studied it much other than do a quick Google search. I did the work on it as a term paper which does mean I know more than the average individual about it. I did the paper while in Georgia at college and it stood as a testament that I stood by my faith and was willing to confront something difficult to do and present it orally in front of a large class fullof non-LDS. I'm passionate about few things and I dare say my beliefs encompass them all.

  • Hey HUH? DUH?
    July 21, 2008 7:30 p.m.

    Don't you think that the LDS people living today who had ancestors who were perpetrators, who also are human and have genuine hurt feelings about their sad ancestors history? You have a very greedy narrow mind and attitude.

    And by the way, huh?...
    I am not a LDS member. But nevertheless you really take the cake on being stupid.

    July 21, 2008 7:30 p.m.


  • Sandy
    July 21, 2008 7:22 p.m.

    I wished some of you critics out there would post on here how you are connected to the Mountain Meadows Massacre and tell us all how it has been part of your life. It seems like a lot of personal involvement with ancestors perhaps on both sides or just plain Mormon basher in full force-what is it with each of you?

  • huh?
    July 21, 2008 7:14 p.m.

    How is this massacre an LDS tragedy? They didn't die, they murdered. The tragedy is for the people, the non-Mormons, who got killed by traveling through Utah!!!

    LDS tragedy? Huh????????????????

  • Methodist Harvard PHD
    July 21, 2008 7:13 p.m.

    So SMU lost to BYU. So......... why be bitter. After all its ancient history and nothing is going to change the outcome for SMU, the Fancher Party, or John Lee and his decendants. As the song says from when i was smoking pot inthe 60s at UC BERKELY: "COME ON PEOPLE NOW SMILE ON YOUR BROTHER, EVERYBODY GET TOGETHER, TRY TO LOVE ONE ANOTHER RIGHT NOW! P.S. Julio made some good points he has been studing . GOOD JOB!

  • HMM
    July 21, 2008 7:07 p.m.

    Here is another atrocity.

    We found, on our arrival at Richmond, that all these things had actually taken place; and in addition to all the rest of these unheared of outrages, eighteen of our citizens had been shot dead at Hauns' Mill, in Caldwell county, and many others wounded, all this without making any resistance. The circumstances of this massacre were as follows: some two hundred robbers, on hearing of the governor's order for extermination, rushed suddenly upon some of our Society, who, on seeing them approach, took shelter in a log building which had been occupied as a blacksmith shop. On seeing their enemies approach in a hostile manner, they cried for quarter, but were instantly fired upon, and when most of them had fallen, and were lying in heaps, in the agonies of death, the murderers put their guns through the crevices between the logs, and shot the dead and dying thro' and through, as a token of bravery, and also to glut their bloodthirsty disposition.

    Clark V. Johnson, ed., The Mormon Redress Petitions: Documents of the 1833-1838 Missouri Conflict, p.89 90

    Any MMM critics care to comment on this atrocity committed against the LDS?

  • What if
    July 21, 2008 7:06 p.m.

    Woulda, coulda, shoulda . . .

    Please show me a more righteous people . . starting with yourself and your own attitude, but only after you enjoy the privilege of being chased out of your home and community 3 times and a significant percentage of your family has died as a result.

    And I don't mean self-righteous . . .

  • Opinions
    July 21, 2008 6:53 p.m.

    Everyone has their opinion about what they "think" or "feel" happened. This book will be an interesting source for reference, but I assume wait until I pass the veil and find out the truth.

    And the Mormon Church has owned up to the event as much as possible with Pres. Hinckley asking these men to find out everything they possibly could about the subject (good and bad). As Saints, we embrace history, learn from it, and move ever onward.

  • SlowS
    July 21, 2008 6:51 p.m.

    Sorry JULIO, but I think there is a heartbreaking number of victims, victims in the millions, because of the evil actions of men. If you are referring to the choices of pre-mortal man, you are talking some pretty esoteric doctrine, which I no longer accept. Let's talk about the topic of this book. The Fancher party, whatever indiscretions they may have perpetrated on the Mormon settlers could not possibly have called for them to be subject to cowardly attack, deceitful surrender and cold-blooded murder at the hands of Mormon settlers and some Native Americans. Their children certainly did not exercise any free agency as their parents were murdered in front of their eyes. We will have to disagree on these points. I hope this book, other books on the topic and further research will some day let us understand how mostly decent Mormon settlers could murder so many mostly decent disenfranchised people from Arkansas.

  • Jackson
    July 21, 2008 6:49 p.m.

    I think there is a enough mud throwing for a life time on this post. You people need to take care of your own lives and not worry so much about the Mormons.

  • Re: The Biggest lie
    July 21, 2008 6:42 p.m.

    Do not get me wrong! The LDS leaders of today are great people! They are honest and faithful and very good people. However, they will not let their own membership know the truths that have been hidden for many years
    If you say this and it is all a lies, are you saying even thought the leadership lie to the members that they are still good people? Are liars good people? Hummmm? You contradict yourself greatly.

    LINDA H.

    July 21, 2008 6:28 p.m.


  • The biggest LDS lie
    July 21, 2008 6:15 p.m.

    Many LDS members and leaders always say "even though the people aren't true/perfect the church is!"

    This is the single biggest lie ever propagated by the LDS church.

    In fact I believe it is that exact opposite!

    The LDS people are generally very true (by this I mean good hearted and nice people), but the Church is based upon lies and not so nice historical leaders.

    MMM just confirms this even more.

    Talk to any LDS person and they are usually the some of the nicest people you will ever meet. They are friendly and generally honest and hardworking people. The one sad thing is that that vast majority of LDS people do not understand their own Church's history of its early leaders. They only see what is given to them by other LDS leaders.

    Do not get me wrong! The LDS leaders of today are great people! They are honest and faithful and very good people. However, they will not let their own membership know the truths that have been hidden for many years.

    Things like MMM and polygamy's fallout are never discussed openly. They should be. May this be a start towards that.

  • Ridgerunner
    July 21, 2008 6:13 p.m.

    I wasn't there at the MMM so I am not really responsible. Because I have German ancestory, does that make me guilty of the Jewish Holocaust? Since Hitler was supposed to be a Lutheran, does that make Lutherans guilty of the Holocaust? If you are desperate to find a reason to justify your hatred of Lutheran's I guess so. Some of you hate way too much! Some of you ignore the facts (the fact that there is no evidence of B.Y's involvement) but that doesn't matter to you. You NEED him to be guilty, so in your thinking, he has to be.

  • To The Mormon future...
    July 21, 2008 6:13 p.m.

    I think you're very possibly right in your statements. But I also think that the LDS people WOULD invite me to their BBQ. After all, we're all neighbors. Modern Mormons may seem fanatical, at times, but they've always been friendly to me. I'm not really worried about a repeat massacre.

  • To Modern Mobbers
    July 21, 2008 6:05 p.m.

    I don't hate Mormons. I used to be one. What I hate is being deceived and lied to. I hate the fact that it took 150 years for the truth to be told. I hate the fact that members are still being told that they will be blessed, even if they do something wrong, as long as they are obedient to their leaders. This is so, so wrong, and it simply needs to stop. The same mindset that existed at Mountain Meadows seems so alive and well today that it just seems a little creepy.

  • Modern Mormons
    July 21, 2008 6:01 p.m.

    Are you LDS folks having a good time? This looks like road rage on here tonight. For those LDS who carry such grudges against those who are only trying to enlighten others with the true facts of the Mormon history, you may need serious professional help. You have denial issues! Your hate of those trying to help you understand your religion's true history will only consume you to the point of becoming a son of perdition. The MMM atrocity is a part of your religion's history and has everything to do with what your religion has become. Perhaps you LDS folks should see a head shrinker. Wait your already too close minded. That won't help at all. You need to expand your minds and see outside of your biased point of view how ridiculous it is to even attempt to rationalize away the murders of 100+ people.

  • Yikesters!
    July 21, 2008 6:01 p.m.

    Some people need to cut down on the caffeine.

  • The Mormon future...
    July 21, 2008 5:50 p.m.

    is crumbling under the weight of more negative press.

    First the embarrassment of the FLDS, who although the LDS Church claim is not LDS. They share the same scriptures, doctrine and history of polygamy. Many LDS today now try to justify or rationalize the polygamist past with "it was only spiritual marriage" etc. What a bunch of bunk!

    Now the MMM events are being brought to light again. More LDS embarrassment. No wonder so many are leaving the Church! The growth of the LDS church is stagnant at best now. Only 8 year old baptisms are keeping the church a float population wise.

    The Internet is now being used to disseminate the meat before the milk is drunk by investigators.

    There is a lot of good in the LDS lifestyle. But it is built upon fanatical and salacious historical facts that have been hidden for over a century.

    Go on and keep thinking that your "Pascal's Wager" will payoff. While the rest of us are truly living better and kinder lives within our communities, not closing ourselves off to others because of religious differences.

    Even LDS are invited over to my house for friendly BBQ. Would LDS do the same?

  • Tina
    July 21, 2008 5:35 p.m.

    I think Brigham intentionally lead these mormon men to commit the murders. Brigham Young also said in his journals (which I read) that the Indians killed the wagontrain people. So he must have known something was going on in Cedar City.

  • SlowS
    July 21, 2008 5:28 p.m.

    re: Janice
    I apologize if you feel I was trying to make victims of descendants of those involved in the horrible tragedy of MMM. With ties and roots in southern and central Utah, I know the general goodness and peacefulness of these people. I was merely trying to point out to JULIO that even the Mormon settlers of that era cannot justify killing disarmed settlers. It's a terrible tragedy that is uncomfortable to look at from any viewpoint. Plus, I don't hate Mormons, I am one as are almost all of my relatives. My question to JULIO is simply at Mountain Meadows, who were the victims?

  • Modern Mobbers
    July 21, 2008 5:30 p.m.

    Are you folks having a good time? This looks like road-rage on here tonight. For those of you who carry so much hate in your heart for Mormons, may need to seek some professional help. Your hate will eventually consume you completely to the end of your life if you do not learn to deal with NOW. The M.M.M. has absolutely nothing to do with any of you. Perhaps you folks should go sleep it off!

  • Lessons to be learned
    July 21, 2008 5:27 p.m.

    There are lessons to be learned from this tragedy of the past. If it seems wrong, then maybe it is wrong. Even Church leaders can lead others astray. We are all responsible for our own actions and can't simply blame whoever is in charge. It's easier to repent of being too kind than too mean and extreme. Religious zealotry is as deadly as any other zeal--even today! Let's all take a deep breath and mellow out.

  • To insanity
    July 21, 2008 5:19 p.m.

    Re: Insane Mormons,

    Your statement was insane. Get a life if you know how???

  • Don't tease the dog
    July 21, 2008 5:16 p.m.

    The Mountain Meadows Massacre happened because of religious persecution.

    It's a fact that if you tease a dog long enough he will bite, and the out come could even prove to be deadly.

  • nathan
    July 21, 2008 4:57 p.m.

    War is hell. Try going to bagdad. All is fair in war and the winners write the history.Julio is right on the money . Have you ever been threatened?During the revolutionary war the British complained because the cowardly americans hid behind trees instead of lining up to be shot at. In kosovo women and children were raped them murdered in front of the men before they were shot. Did you go stop it? Every year thousands of people die in accidents caused by drunk drivers. What are you doing about it. Life sucks then you die, then god takes care of the victims and the perpetrators. Millions of little babies are mudered by their own parents with help from the us govt. what are you doing to stop that.

  • Tired
    July 21, 2008 4:53 p.m.

    Abraham lied to protect his wife. He said that she was his sister. Does that make him less of a prophet or example? There have been so many atrocities throught history on many fronts. Most of them in the name of religion. the crusades come to mind. Jesus Christ himself was called a rebel because he taught that he was the son of God. that really went over big with Ceaser. I am not condoning what happened in Southern Utah. what happened happened. No excuses. So did linengrad but there are many, Leaders for entire nations of the same leanage that totally denigh that if even happened, against overwhelming proof and survivers. We will never know what goes on in the heartsand minds of men when they are confronted with decisions. that is between them and their god whomever that is. Argueing about it and pointing fingers is unproductive. blind faith is unproductive. Develope a relationship with your God whomever that may be and do unto others as you would have done unto you. Live the ten Commandments ( oh by the way Moses was a murderer or was that too long ago for you to remember)

  • About time
    July 21, 2008 4:47 p.m.

    I'm glad the Church is finally allowing an open look at this part of it's history. I'm afraid it has been less than honest in the past, which has led to many false stories that exist in the minds of members today.

    Perhaps we can all learn from the mistakes that have been made. Maybe we can learn to be less trusting of our leaders, and more courageous and willing to stand forward when something wrong is being done in the name of religion. We can learn to trust our own sense of reason and logic. If so, then re-addressing the issue will have done some good.

  • Answer me this
    July 21, 2008 4:44 p.m.

    What it all boils down to is that the early Mormon church and today's Taliban have a lot in common. Both committed acts of atrocity because they were on God's side and felt fully justified in doing so.

    Why is it that "God's army" always acts with such conviction and righteous indignation, yet always seems to be on the wrong side?

  • Janice
    July 21, 2008 4:37 p.m.

    Re: Slow S

    And some of you who constantly keep stirring the pot on the MMM are as well making victims out of descendants of the perpetrators. You stone throwers will not stop at any point. All your personal hate and bigotry against all Mormons will not seize. You modern Mormon mobber's of today are still victimizing Mormons and their descendants. Perhaps you need to put to rest that MMM victims are dead and gone and have nothing to do with any of you Mormon haters of today. But you are making victims out of the innocent descendants of the Mormons who's ancestors were involved in MMM--shame on you evil people!

  • Anonymous
    July 21, 2008 4:33 p.m.

    Brigham Young could have just as easily stirred up his followers against gays and they would have all gone out blindly and voted to pass an amendment to the constitution forbidding gay marriage!

    Mountain Meadows is about blind obedience and religious fanaticism.

    So is Proposition 8

  • SlowS
    July 21, 2008 4:33 p.m.

    um JULIO,

    The Fancher Party was from Arkansas.

  • parowan patriot
    July 21, 2008 4:28 p.m.

    My great great great granpas journal records the goings on. But none of the reseachers have it or all the other contemperaneous records.I am sure they have done their best with the resources available to them. An interesting item in the journal records how a waterhole that had been in use for a long time was found to be poisoned right after the Fancher company had camped there. Many cattle died along with other animals who drank there. Grandpa says the robinson boy died after eating meat from the dead cattle. He says many buzzards and other scavengers dies as a result. He was there and helped burn the carcasses of the dead animals. So just because this story is not in the book dosen't mean it didnt happen. What if some one poisoned your water supply, how would you feel?

  • Insane Mormons
    July 21, 2008 4:25 p.m.

    Will you Mormons quit trying to make excuses for the MMM?!

    You are absolutely insane to believe that ANYTHING can excuse the cold-blooded slaughter of over 100 men, women, and children!

    There is NO EXCUSE for it, so WHY ARE YOU TRYING!?

    You only show your real colors by such insanity.

  • History lives now
    July 21, 2008 4:21 p.m.

    Unfortunately the history of Mormon abuse of non-mormons is a living thread. Oh yes, Virginia...the fundamentalist Mormons are alive and well in Utah. You don't have to look too far. They have their own secret society of self-rightous hypocrits who are all too eager to use others, judge them, discard them, and claim their own set of rules under which to follow. Oh yes, Virginia they go to church every Sunday, yet on Monday they are all too willing to manipulate, deceive, and to exploit. They are living, breathing, and continuing right here in Utah County. They never owe anyone an explanation, but rather take copius notes of those who do not act in according to their own views. Hey, this one goes out to the self rightous in Elk Ridge..see anyone smoking boys?? If so, don't forget to get their name. Yes, indeed...Virginia..history lives now.

  • Threadkiller
    July 21, 2008 4:10 p.m.

    Yes, Mormons have been persecuted. The MMM story is about civilians being slaughtered in front of their children after surrendering their guns.

    July 21, 2008 4:06 p.m.


  • SlowS
    July 21, 2008 3:59 p.m.

    um JULIO,

    The Fancher Party were the victims, they were slaughtered in front of their children.

  • Anonymous
    July 21, 2008 3:47 p.m.


    And now in the name of religion, you want to do essentially the same thing to gays?

  • Texas Ranger
    July 21, 2008 3:45 p.m.

    Why don't we see in the media books/news about the hundreds of Mormons murdered and persecuted by mobs during the early history of the church and how they were driven from their homes in the dead of winter?

  • Grama Jane
    July 21, 2008 3:41 p.m.

    Certainly the MMM was a horrible atrocity that shouldn't have happened yet looking at the fuller picture, psychologically one can see the Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome working in the LDS people who had been SO OFTEN victims of mobs, burnings, violence, rapes and murder themselves! Look at what the mob did to Joseph Smith?

    At the time of the MMM, the US govt. had sent an ARMY to Utah, (without trying ANY talks first!) to supposedly put down a treasonous rebellion! I understand in the settlement that LDS participants were given amnesty.

    In light of the PAST PERSONAL experiences of the LDS people, what should LDS expect to happen to them?? They had gotten NO HELP whatsoever from the govt. or officials, before, during or after their sufferings, though they went with the proof.

    I'm glad that this book is availabe. I find it interesting that no one seems to want to find out who did the murders of the LDS at Hauns Mill Massacre, or of the MANY others murders of LDS. Does anyone try to find out who participated or was responsible for the Crusades?? Shall we hold the pope and all Catholics today responsible? FORGIVE ALL!

  • MMM rumors
    July 21, 2008 3:40 p.m.

    Rumors abound re MMM. The emigrants didnt poison the waterholes. The Native Americans didnt instigate it. The Mormons were not afraid of the emigrants because of past persecutions. They thought they might need supplies to flee the army, so they wouldnt sell any supplies to wagon trains and were excessively charging emigrants just to grind small amounts of grain. This created unnecessary tension, because as it turned out the army was not expected before winter.

    The Town Marshall wanted arrest some of the emigrants on charges of intoxication and blasphemy, but had to back down. The Mormons were intent on chasing them down and arresting them and requested the militia, which was DENIED. Haight and others formulated a plan to do it anyway using the help of the Paiutes. AGAIN, the plan was met with resistance from the Council, and when Haight pushed harder, they told him to send a dispatch to Brigham Young for advice. Communication between Haight and Lee broke down here, because Lee jumped the gun and attacked the wagon train. MMM was planned and organized. Richard Turley addresses the inaccuracies. Check the newsroom at Turley's article based on his research is dated 6/19/07.

    July 21, 2008 3:36 p.m.

    I have to agree with julio. The mindset of americans in that time was interesting.The south justified slavery with appeals to the bible. And both north and south felt justified in going to war against other americans , resulting in over 600,000 deaths and many horrific injuries. In addition to the us army marching on utah there were many inflamtory editorials in eastern newspapers and debates in congress calling for the anihilation of the mormons. In the fancher party there was a group called the missouri wilcats who bragged about mobbing mormons in missouri. They claimed to have then gun that killed joseph smith. Also beloved mormon apostle Parley P Pratt had been murdered in arkansas a few months before. His murderer was never tried for his crime. After all, all he did was kill a mormon. No big deal to the local authorities.

  • D. Michael Bass
    July 21, 2008 3:27 p.m.

    To Ernest T.,

    If there is proof "spin," you still haven't offered any.

    You continue to dodge the issue. Please define "objective history," and please name one "outside source" of "objective history."

    You can't.

    "Entire, objective history" is not recoverable. This is one of the unfortunate limitations of historiography. Why do you hold the Church to a standard that every one of your "outside sources" (e.g., Quinn) fail to meet?

  • Jamie
    July 21, 2008 2:52 p.m.

    Re: JULIO
    Thank you for such a good comment. Many of us will agree with you. What you said is true fact and true history... Thanks again!

  • julio
    July 21, 2008 2:31 p.m.


  • Ernest T. Bass
    July 21, 2008 2:06 p.m.

    re: To Ernest:
    Yes, I know they are. My little bro, D. Michael claims there is no proof of spin from FARMS and No. Temple. I'm simply pointing out that the fact that the entire, objective history is never included in their "research" shows that there is spin. One must go to outside sources to find the truth. That is spin and that is my entire point.

  • Kyle
    July 21, 2008 1:58 p.m.

    Re: Leadership aint easy 5:04pm,

    If Brigham couldn't handle the position, he should not have battled Sydney and others for it. He should have stepped aside and let a more competant leader take charge.

    Its interesting that you wrote this. Actually, it was Sidneys inflammatory speeches that caused the clashes between the Mormons and the Missourians, which to make a long story short, eventually lead to the extermination order. Rigdon was ultra-militant to the point of being detrimentally affected by religious fervor; but then again extreme zeal could rally the followers and made for strong and popular leadership in those days. BY and Rigdon both sparked fires with incendiary speeches and were unable to control the results. Even more interesting that after the disaster in Missouri, BY allowed it to occur again. As others have mentioned, whether it be religious, political or military, fanaticism that induces and controls group beliefs/actions has been well documented through history. Seems like the old adage is true: Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

  • To Ernest
    July 21, 2008 1:51 p.m.

    Dead Earnest - All those things are available to the merely curious. Pick up a book.

  • D. Michael Bass
    July 21, 2008 1:43 p.m.

    Ernest T.,

    On the contrary, I think a dictionary would be a rather sound investment for you. And, yes, type slower, you might make fewer mistakes(e.g., "expostor").

    Just how would you define "objective"? And when did it become the Church's responsibility to present opposing viewpoints? If you don't trust the Church--and clearly you don't-- you can go to other sources.

    But can you even name an "objective" source? The Church is no less "objective," than its critics (you included.) Consequently your frequent shouts of "spin! spin!" continue to ring hollow. You have yet to show how the Church and FARMS "spin" anything. You have failed to even define "spin" in any cogent way. You simply continue to assert that people "spin." You seem to assume that "viewpoint" and "spin" are synonymous. They are not.

    Just asserting something over and over--the broken record approach--does not make said assertion a fact. And, yes, "broken record" is an apt metaphor here considering your fondness for the word "spin."

    If you have all the facts regarding MMM, polygamy, the Nauvoo Expositor episode, etc., by all means lay them out and enlighten us all. You still haven't cited one.

  • Typical LDS logic
    July 21, 2008 12:52 p.m.

    To Tina and all the others | 1:26 a.m

    "heaven forbid that true scholarship and examination of the historical record should stand in the way of something your hunches tell you is true."

    You should try applying that same logic to the Book of Mormon.

    You can't pick and choose where to apply facts in order to determine the truth.

  • Just the Facts
    July 21, 2008 12:45 p.m.


    It is good you saw the monument.

    Too bad you couldn't have seen several of the previous monuments that have been erected there over the years.

    Brigham Young ordered at least one of those previous monuments destroyed!

    That is an historical fact.

    Sounds like he wasn't interested in the truth, doesn't it.

    Would any of you apologists like to try to explain how ANY circumstances (fear of the government, etc.) could possibly explain Brigham Young ordering a monument destroyed years after the fact?!

  • Let's Learn From the Past
    July 21, 2008 12:39 p.m.

    As I've read these comments, it is clear there are two lessons to be learned from the Mountain Meadows Massacre:

    1) NEVER put blind faith in authority of any kind! This is especially true of religious authority because the emotions associated with spirituality are confusing and dangerous.

    2) LDS Church leaders are NOT immune from making mistakes, sinning, and leading their followers wrong ("astray").

    So long as we keep those two very important lessons in mind, perhaps something good can come from this tragedy.

    But if we fail to learn these two important lessons, not only will those people have died in vain, but history will repeat itself and more people will be harmed or murdered in the name of obedience to authority!

  • Ernest T. Bass
    July 21, 2008 12:21 p.m.

    D. Michael, thanks again for the dictionary lesson. Saves me the need to buy one.
    And yes, "perogitive" sounds right to me and 99% of the population. Or maybe I'm just "ignernt".
    So, why don't we EVER hear an objective history of the Church unless we go to a source other than the Church itself?
    Why don't they tell us the background on the expostor or the background on the extermination order; with regards to Sidney Rigdon's speech, or polygamy; the ages of some brides along with the fact they many of them were already married to other men.
    "Spin" is not objective. The LDS Church as a source is not objective, therefore they "spin" things to sound favorable.
    Maybe I should type slower so you could understand.
    Doubt it.

  • Jackie
    July 21, 2008 12:08 p.m.

    To Anonymous

    I agree, leaders of people can bring their followers down to hell, and than run from the hell that they themselves have created for their followers. And then act pious and innocent like they never, never knew or had anything to do with the evil massacre they encouraged and created their followers to engage in. Leaders and their cowardly acts always SHOVE SHOVE SHOVE the blame to someone else... that makes them a true coward.

    I hope someday there will be peace for MMM ALL VICTIMS on BOTH SIDES!

  • Anonymous II
    July 21, 2008 11:40 a.m.


    You are partially correct. What you ignore is that all of these examples you cite are examples NOT of horrible things being done "out of fear for themselves and their families." Rather, they are done by people who identify themselves with an organization, and who are coerced or deceived into such horrible acts by powerful leaders who use them like pawns to manipulate and deceive.

    The Stake President who ordered the Mountain Meadows Massacre claimed to be acting on orders from above, as did John D. Lee. Massacres of Indian encampments happened in the name of "Manifest Destiny" and the policy of the U.S. Government at the time. Those like my uncle who participated in the My Lai massacre DID NOT VOLUNTEER to go to Vietnam! They were DRAFTED! The SS members were also COERCED in the Nazi murder of millions of Jews and gays.

    The Obedience to authority doctrines in the Church are no different in that regard than the obedience to authority policies in the military. It is the glue that binds the exploited pawn to their kings so the kings can carry out their will and then deny the bad stuff by blaming the pawns!

  • Does it matter?
    July 21, 2008 11:32 a.m.

    Does it really matter who did what?

    Can we move past this?

    Are we going to dig BY up from his grave and try him?

  • William
    July 21, 2008 11:23 a.m.

    Re Raymond Takashi Swensen, Elizabeth, & Anna Rose

    Thank for writing comments that make sense. I fully agree with you 3 people. Peace & Forgiveness = Love and Godliness.

    Hate, hating and stirring up Hate = The Devil & Hell.

  • Anna Rose
    July 21, 2008 10:27 a.m.

    I agree with Elizabeth. This book needs to be fair for both sides of the M.M.M. fence or it will indeed never end. There are thousands and thousands of Mormon descendants form the M.M.Massacre who suffer over this horrible event, just as those do from the massacred group. It is time for peace. Some people out there need get over their hate, venomous anger and learn to forgive. We need the spirit of God, and not the spirit of the devil to heal, so that there can peace for all.

  • K2
    July 21, 2008 10:25 a.m.

    Good move by Chuckles55 and wife to visit the site and also, Lee's Ferry. This will give helpful insight as to our viewpoints other than just reading the book.
    And Richard, concerning everything coming out being hypothetical - we study and learn about the past such that we can ponder our present and future. I'm not sure that hypothetical is the right word when pertinent information has been stored in private vaults and not accessible. Good point of yours, that apparently not too many fully grasp, is that one must try (the difficult part) to view events in the continuity of the social dynamic of the time and circumstances, e.g., no cell phones. [:>)

  • Anonymous
    July 21, 2008 10:22 a.m.

    Bear Rug,

    Your sarcasm is a juvenile as your little "fingers pointing back" cliche (which means absolutely nothing, by the way). Save it for the playground.

    What is wrong with people today believing they can actually know about something that happened over 100 years ago? Don't YOU claim to "know" (beyond a shadow of a doubt ) that Joseph Smith had a vision over 100 years ago? And don't you claim to "know" so many things about his life -- so much so that you "have a testimony" and savor the wonderful images in your mind of him praying innocently in the grove of trees, and you have confidence in you IMAGINATION of all those events that happened well over 100 years ago!?

    No, nobody alive today was at Mountain Meadows. But neither was anybody alive today at the "Sacred Grove"! So by your own admission, "We weren't there. We won't be able to answer EVERY question about this episode. Our modern-day leaders will not be able to answer every question."

    But you still claim to "know"! How foolishly arrogant and self-deceived you are!

  • Raymond Takashi Swenson
    July 21, 2008 10:15 a.m.

    Many of the worst things that people do are done out of fear for themselves and their families. The same US Army troops who were marching toward Utah and the Mormons when the Mountain Meadows Massacre took place performed their own massacre of Indians soon after their arrival. Other massacres of Indian encampments happened all over the West for decades. It should not be forgotten that abnormally brutal behavior is possible for ordinary people when they are enlisted in military units that are badly led. The My Lai massacre and the massacres of Filipino civilians by Japanese troops share a common psychology with the Nazi murder of millions of Jews and others. The random bombings of London and the mass fire bomb raids against Dresden and Japanese cities killed millions of civilians. The nuclear weapons still in the arsenals of many nations threaten the killing of millions in one blow. 21st Century humans are still ready to kill not 120, but 120,000 at a time. And over 3000 people were killed on 9/11/2001 by a few Islamic jihadists. This is a problem not of Mormons, but of all human beings.

  • Phil
    July 21, 2008 9:55 a.m.

    This book will never be published. They've promised its release for 10 years. These historians are incapable of actually producing anything. Not because the subject is controversial but because they never finish anything.

  • Elizabeth
    July 21, 2008 9:52 a.m.

    Apologies are not enough for some people. There are people out there who rather enjoy festering up evil hate against the Mormons, and with their evil websites that are full of nothing but lie after lie. I say, let this rest once and for all! And, I hope after Richards Turleys book release next month there will be no more said. I hope and pray Mr. Turleys book is fair to all involved, or this may never end.
    Good day folks!

  • Let's not forget
    July 21, 2008 9:28 a.m.

    As a Latter-day Saint I welcome this full and frank discussion. "The truth will set you free." It is a sad part of our history. We've owned it, apologized, and life can go on. But let's never forget the victims.

  • Ben
    July 21, 2008 9:01 a.m.

    Just saying it isn't gambling doesn't change the realty. You are just gambling on God and religion. That is not true faith. In fact, it is cowardice. It suggests that IF the odds were "likely" to go the other way, you would abandon God and the Church because the odds went the other way. What kind of religious baloney is that?

    You need to do some real soul searching, because you really are not a sincere believer!

    Good luck.

  • Bear Rug
    July 21, 2008 8:46 a.m.

    I am so glad that I live in an enlightened society, where everybody knows everything about something that happened over 100 years ago. It is comforting to know that we can read a newspaper article and then pass judgment on others. I know, I know, some of you have the inside track on the history of the LDS religion. You KNOW ALL there is to know about the leadership, and their actions, as well as those of the general membership.
    The MMM was a terrible thing. Those that perpetrated the act will answer for those crimes. We weren't there. We won't be able to answer EVERY question about this episode. Our modern-day leaders will not be able to answer every question. The best thing to do is to make sure that WE are doing right things, that our behaviour is correct. We will NEVER have to answer for the sins of others. We also need to remember that when we point a finger at someone, we have three pointing back at us.

  • Running Off the Ridge
    July 21, 2008 8:39 a.m.

    Ridgerunner - There are a lot more scenarios available to all of us. That's a pretty limited choice you've relegated yourself to.

  • D. Michael Bass
    July 21, 2008 8:23 a.m.

    Ernest T.,

    If "perogitive" looks or sounds right to you, you probably shouldn't be using it.

    You raise an interesting question, though: why did William Law publish the Nauvoo Expositor? You then evade your own question with an insinuation that the Church is guilty of misrepresenting history, without offering one shred of supporting evidence or dealing with a single fact pertinent to your question. Sounds like "spin" to me.

    This kind of laziness is typical of your posts.

  • Jack from Ark
    July 21, 2008 8:15 a.m.

    Great Idea for this book now lets do the prequel Let this be the forth in a series. The first could be the Missouri years "run the Mormons out" second Hauns mill"the planning to run the Mormons out" City of Joseph "oh yeah run the Mormons out" I absolutely abhor what happened at MMM and there is no justification for it, but context is a strange phenomenon, we try to judge what happens through todays eyes. This is impossible. We can never know what was in the hearts of these men. Bottom line It happened a long time before I became aware of the church and it has absolutely no affect on what I believe today.

    Our detractors have always tried to judge our Church by the actions of a few. Please let them judge by the works as a whole and in context. The reality is that these things shouldn't have happened, but they did and nothing we can do or say will appease the detractors or please the others.
    Please lets just move on and let this book be put in the archives for all to see and read and make up their own mind.

  • Anonymous
    July 21, 2008 5:39 a.m.

    As Einstein said, "Blind respect for authority is the greatst enemy of truth." The real essential question isn't whether or not Brighan Young ordered the masacre (he probably didn't) or whether he created an atmosphere that led otherwise church-going, law-abiding men to commit such a grotesque atrocity (he probbly did), but rather whether these church-going, law-abiding men who were asked to undertake the most horrible deed imaginable would have "prayed over it" before doing it and if so, what questions does that raise?

  • ED
    July 21, 2008 4:22 a.m.

    With the MMM becoming more well known around the world the Church is facing a real problem with the declared statement that following the direction (and atittudes) of our leaders (who presumably speak for the prophet) will never lead us astray. In this instance this caused a major problem --- and it probably hasn't been the first time before or since. Not even prophets are perfect. In the final analysis one has to look at that rare commodity called "common sense" for direction.

  • Re: Ben
    July 21, 2008 2:08 a.m.

    It's not gambling at all, it's a choice, a decision like everything else in life. Thanks for your comments.

  • To Tina and all the others
    July 21, 2008 1:26 a.m.

    I am amazed at how many people come on here and proclaim that Brigham Young most certainly was responsible for MMM. Are you the same people who insisted, with equal lack of evidence, that JonBenet Ramsey's parents were responsible for her murder? I hope none of you will read this book, because heaven forbid that true scholarship and examination of the historical record should stand in the way of something your hunches tell you is true.

  • Verl Doman
    July 20, 2008 11:08 p.m.

    Real devotion to the LDS Church is a matter of personal spiritual conviction. The conclusions of this book or the wish of some to discredit the Church will not impact those with such a conviction.

    We aready know that humans make mistakes. The massacre was an horrible, inexcusable mistake, and is not the only mistake ever made by members of the LDS church or of other churches. There may be other gross things done by some that would embarrass or offend, but the Spirit does not lie and will sustain those who have been blessed to be recipients of its powerful witness in spite of whatever is suggested or supposedly discovered by those who do not understand this source of truth. "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
    (1 Corinthians 2:14)

  • Ben
    July 20, 2008 10:31 p.m.


    This is a poor version of the classic "Pascal's Wager" and it amounts to placing a bet in favor of God.

    That is not real faith. That is gambling. According to my understanding of Christianity, if all you are doing is gambling on God, you lose!

    Perhaps more importantly, the exact same logic (playing the odds) is used to justify an atheist, criminal lifestyle.

    Your logic is not Christian. Better luck next time!

  • Anonymous
    July 20, 2008 10:29 p.m.

    Well said, Ryan. I fully agree.

  • Ted
    July 20, 2008 10:14 p.m.

    To 7:11pm
    The list you speak of is inaccurate. So perhaps you don't know any more than anyone else on here. And you are no self proclaimed expert either.

    To- Principle 1950
    I agree with you, a great many LDS descendants from the perpetrators of M. M. M., are as well VICTIMS and suffer greatly over the M. M. Massacre. A lot of people seem to over look this. Why should their feeling not be included?

  • Its a no Brainer!
    July 20, 2008 9:34 p.m.

    Can anyone imagine for even for a second that the Leaders of the day would do anything without Brigham Youngs permission?? And especially something like this!! He ruled with an iron fist and everyone knew what it meant to be on the wrong side of him!! Some say he tried to stop it, so therefor he knew about it, and if he knew about it, then someone must have asked him for his permission. So if they asked for permission they certainly would not have proceeded without knowing the answer. Either way, he set up the feelings and attitude that led to this awful event. So in reality he is accountable for the action of his influence over his followers.

  • Ernest T. Bass
    July 20, 2008 9:33 p.m.

    It looks like my little brother, D. Michael Bass received a dictionary for his birthday.
    Just one example is the reason WHY William Law published the Nauvoo Expositor. We never hear the reason behind it, instead it's implied that we were the victims.
    That is just one of MANY examples of spin.

  • Kyle
    July 20, 2008 8:59 p.m.


    Youve erred. I have no "prediscriminatory bias" (is that even a word?) toward the LDS...I am one. And following your suggestion, I will try to "get over myself", but as a history professor, I do often enjoy these types topics.

  • Amy
    July 20, 2008 8:10 p.m.

    One thing I never understood was why these people even NEEDED to send a message to ask Brigham Young whether or not they should attack a wagon train full of settlers. I mean, its sort of a common sense type of thing. Brigham Young was a very powerful leader, so I have to wonder how much brain-washing was going on.

  • How About the Movie
    July 20, 2008 8:09 p.m.

    So, how can I see the Jon Voight movie about this, or do I need to get it from Netflix or go out-of-state. Mormons like to tell of the offenses in Missouri, which is understandable, but never seem to tell of the massacre in Utah against non-Mormons.

  • Ernest T. Bass
    July 20, 2008 7:45 p.m.

    Looks like my little brother, D. Michael Bass received a dictionary for Christmas.
    Here's one: Why don't we ever hear the truth about the Nauvoo Expositer? There is background to why William Law published it but we never hear what it is.
    That, my friend, is spin. Massive amounts of spin.

  • Ken
    July 20, 2008 7:45 p.m.

    Geez. This is anews story not time time for testimony. Some of you look very silly and are the reason why people look upon us as the rabid mormons you all depict.

  • Ryan
    July 20, 2008 7:27 p.m.

    I think beyond the issue of whether Brigham Young knew about the massacre, the event is instructive for any follower of Jesus Christ. Leaders play an important role in any great effort--especially in serving God. But the Holy Ghost and personal revelation play an imparative role. Most leaders are righteous, and adhering to their counsel can result in much greater achievements than the individual acting in isolation coul accomplish. But in my strong opinion, it's wrong to say "Do Everything the Stake President Asks Without Question." At the end of the day, obedience refers to obedience to God. While hopefully not often, this will sometimes mean dissobedience to a Bishop Stake President or other church leader. While the lesson is nuanced, it's one that I think leaders must articulate.

  • the meadow attitude is alive
    July 20, 2008 7:25 p.m.

    and well, all one has to do is visit SE Utah , get a glimpse on how the natives are treated...let me see the ex county commissioner and son are now in federal prison cells...on a pyramid scheme which bilked some 111million dollars away from hurting school districts..nationally the local papers showed pictures of the ex county commissioner recieving some citizen of the year award while awaiting their trial..then some crazy guy broke a restraining order a while back , causing his friends to try to declare a militia just help save him...the courts in that area were ordered to stop and desist on their practice of not including native americans on the jury pool this in a county with 55% native population well the list just goes on..all in the area of what's the couple who kidnapped their daughter to keep her from getting married history bah hum bug!

  • To Richard @ 5:51
    July 20, 2008 7:11 p.m.

    Other than the fact you say you studied MMM in college (BYU maybe?) Im not sure why youre a self-proclaimed expert, but the victims list is online. Couldn't find 30 survivors.

    18 children all under the age of 6 survived. Over 30 children between the ages of 7 and 17 (including some infants) were brutally murdered with their parents.

  • Ridgerunner
    July 20, 2008 6:23 p.m.

    I have greatly enjoyed the debate on these blogs. I would like to weigh in with my view just in case it helps someone who struggles with their faith (like I used to)
    There are but two possible scenarios. #1: There is a God, the B of M is true and the LDS church is the only true church (has all correct doctines).
    #2: If the athiests are right, The B of M is a fraud, there is no God and the Church is deceiving people.

    If #2 turns out to be correct, my faith has given me much joy and happiness all through my life as I share it with my loved ones. (only I would know this-not anyone else). Therefore, if the atheists are right, when we all die, everything goes dark and that is the end. What did my faith give me in this scenario? Happiness and joy!

    If #1 turns out to be right I get happiness in this life and eternal happiness with my forever family!

    I win in both cases because of my faith! What does the alternative bring? Despair, darkness and no hope! I choose faith every time!

  • principal1950
    July 20, 2008 6:07 p.m.

    My husband's 2nd great grandfather was the bishop in Cedar City, at the time of the MMM, and deeply involved. I can attest to the pain that this incident has caused to the descendants of the perpetrators of it. I consider the descendants to be victims, also, and hope some resolution, peace and understanding can come to all involved in some way from reading this new book.

  • Richard
    July 20, 2008 5:51 p.m.

    To Leadership Ain't Easy:

    You likely never understood that in order to be heard over many people, one had to speak loudly before microphones and PA systems so of course BY had to have been loud, spiritually strong, etc. He was never ambiguous in what he meant to me. Do you understand everything Jesus meant or everything that was meant in Revelations? Those might be very well construed as to be unclear so by saying that BY should have given up to Sydney Rigdon, you are saying that Peter was the rightful ruler of the church and were Clementine and Linus his followers instead of John who was writing Revelations on Patmos. By was a man but like I said before, there was hardly time enough to get word from that local far end to SLC and back again with even an answer as the messenger arrived just after it ended. What was the message? Let them pass and keep the peace, certainly not decicde for yourselves or kill them all. If it had been the latter, there would not have been 30 some odd children who survived it.

  • Richard
    July 20, 2008 5:48 p.m.

    Kyle your words show an obvious prediscriminatory bias against LDS to begin with and you do need to get over yourself. Of course it needs to be remembered but who remembers any single atrocity committed by any other church during the 1800's off the top of their heads? Do the local masons, not the entire masonry who denounced Joseph's murder, even take responsibility for killing a masonic order brother? They never have but justify their actions by having been a part of that mob. No one was ever punished for that, by the way. But some of the men in the mob died grizzly deaths after participating in that terrible act. History is written by the winners of wars and Utah (Deseret) never waged a war against its inevitab le statehood in the U.S. so guess who gets to write the history. Certainly it is a better thing there was not a war against statehood but we will never get the truth and it is not "far worse" to blame the indians especially since there was absolutely some culpability there. The Church apologized because it feels it could have diffused the situation but did not and therefore shoulders the blame/responsibility.

  • Tina
    July 20, 2008 5:31 p.m.

    Brigham Young was responsible for the MMM. No doubt in my mind.

  • Daniel
    July 20, 2008 5:23 p.m.

    Re:One who has questions
    I have the same questions? I wonder if this new Richard Turley book will answer any of them?

  • Emmie
    July 20, 2008 5:14 p.m.

    RE: Kyle
    I agree with you. Thanks

  • Lisa
    July 20, 2008 5:06 p.m.

    Hey Kyle , get over yourself.

  • Leadership Ain't Easy
    July 20, 2008 5:04 p.m.

    Brigham was VERY inflammatory in MANY of his speaches!

    Many True Blue Mormons will insist that doesn't make him responsible for MMM.

    But "if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air." (1 Corinthians 14:8-9).

    If a prophet is not clear, the blood spilt by his misunderstanding followers is on HIS hands!

    If Prophets are going to claim to speak for God, they are responsible for being clear. Brigham wasn't, and there should be little doubt in anyone's mind that is why he tried to cover things up.

    If Brigham couldn't handle the position, he should not have battled Sydney and others for it. He should have stepped aside and let a more competant leader take charge.

  • Kyle
    July 20, 2008 4:31 p.m.

    I dont "hate" the LDS Church or leaders, but I do hate that some members demand MMM be dropped because it's "ancient history", yet they persist in defending the actions of murderers--or worse lay blame on the Indians. Obviously, history gets distorted in the eyes of some in order to avoid facing a few disturbing realities.

    You cannot understand MMM if you dont understand that early Mormons weren't exactly a peaceful, religious people. Leaders made vengeful, inflammatory speeches that stirred hate/fear in locals. Mormons raised a militia and there were clashes between Mormons and legal/military authorities BEFORE the infamous Missouri extermination order occurred. Plural marriage wasn't common knowledge in Missouri, and wasn't a factor then.

    While BY can't be tied directly to MMM, he was no doubt indirectly responsible due to his OWN well-documented inflammatory rhetoric. Perhaps it was "misinterpreted" by the members as the leader's standing approval to avenge the murders of early saints and protect themselves from outsiders. Additionally, some culpability can be inferred by the behavior BY exhibited after the deed was done.

    If one believes that God micro-manages the Church and prophets are infallible, then accepting the transgressions of history may prove far too problematic.

  • One who has questions
    July 20, 2008 4:19 p.m.

    It is said that Brigham instucted the mormons NOT to help this wagontrain.

    Apprently their was something very disagreeable or wrong with this wagon train.

    What is it?

    What is being covered up or atleast not talked about?

    Why were the people told not to help this wagon train as opposed to other wagon trains?

    Why is all focus on the church and who was or wasn't involved in the massacre?

    Who were these wagon train people?

    Why do we know so little about them and their past?

    Why were they denied help in their travels through utah?

    Who are these arkansasans? what is their past?

  • I'm a devout Mormon....
    July 20, 2008 4:13 p.m.

    ....who is glad to have as ample an account of what can be known about the Massacre.

    I disagree with my fellow Mormons who feel the event should be forgotten. It should be remembered and contemplated. This need not involve exascerbation and self-flagellation: just reflection.

    I agree with my fellow Mormons who say we should look to the future, and would add that understanding MMM will help us do exactly that.

    I strongly disagree with my fellow Mormons who justify, either directly or indirectly, the murder of the Missouri company, or who call it anything less than murder.

    I beleive the Church is true, that Joseph was God's prophet, as was Brigham and his successors, and that God will accomplish his purposes. I imagine this will be difficult, in part because, as the Lord revealed to Joseph, almost all men are profoundly imperfect (DC 121). Mormons ought to be the last people on earth to be surprised at their own imperfections. We're all better off when we learn from our mistakes, and marvell, as I do, the Lord mercifully and patiently continues to invite us to share in it.

  • Richard in Texas
    July 20, 2008 3:24 p.m.

    I wonder if the book will address the theory of blood atonement as a motive.

  • Richard
    July 20, 2008 2:58 p.m.

    Wesley: I don't see that we disagree. You might try reading up to all of my postings here where I state the same things you did. I am glad to see that you are open to envisioning the dynamics of the time and the difficulties with the situation that ensued afterwards. John D. Lee gave a deathbed confession I had to cite showing how he blamed BY for not getting back with help in time, not giving him an execution order that he really wanted. He blames BY for everything as he was executed and yes, there were up to 50 other Mormon men involved in the tragedy and they were the local militia, essentially. If any of you have seen how sparsely populated that area is even today, you will likely be able to picture how hard it would have been to tell your neighbor living several miles away to go and gather the help and come on down for an anti-LDS hangin' (sarcasm doesn't help here, I know). 50 LDS men at most against 120 armed travellers in a defensive position circled wagon train. It is obvious that the LDS did not do it alone.

  • Janice
    July 20, 2008 2:47 p.m.

    Does anyone know if there is a blog where we don't have to log in that is similar as Des., News, blogs that we can discuss and talk about the M M M ? I have many questions about M M M?

  • Wesley J.
    July 20, 2008 2:26 p.m.

    Re: Mr Richard

    Who killed these people? Was it the Indians or the Mormons, or both? I would say probably both, but lean towards the Indians who had one of their own die from the poison water. I have seen where a lot of people who passionately hate the Mormons have said all the Mormons who were near by the massacre were murderers, clubbing's, and shooters, and which I know is not true. The true few murderers ran and hid, and the others who were near by stayed as witnesses, and who were not shooters nor clubbers, as some nonmember Mormon hater has made up on his website. There are some terrible liars out there who just make up stuff about the Mormons with no proof what so ever. These people try with all their might to damage reputations of others. I find them very evil.

  • Richard
    July 20, 2008 2:11 p.m.

    Fredd: Nearly 100% of the children survived the massacre/tragedy, whatever you wish to call it shows your bias one way or another. If you want to know more, just aske their descendants who were brought up hating Mormons back in Missouri and Arkansas (possibly or even likely). Sadly, a few of the infants did die at the hands of the MIXED LDS and Paiute group. These were held in the arms of their mothers who did not wish to let them go back and remain with the older children and survive. Killing the women does not seem to be something any group would decide to do especially "God-fearing" people. On the other hand, seeing how Mormons are so well known for keeping a journal, scripture, accurate daily records of events even today, they documented theoirown persecutions well including when the wildcats killed Mormon women for years leading up to that time before the Mormon "threat" was ran completely out of civilization under extermination orders that were signed by the governor of Missouri allowing anyone to kill a Mormon and do so legally, regardless of their age, gender, hair color, etc. This was on the books in Missouri mid-1970 even still.

  • Richard
    July 20, 2008 1:43 p.m.

    Bill is correct concerning the "Missouri wildcats" whom the emigrants likely believed would protect them from the vicious Mormons because "they had encountered their kind and would serve as good bodyguards" while going through the territory. The party should have gone straight through SLC and this would never have happened either.

    To anyone who thinks that BY could have had anything to do with this: I state this only because of how much has been said and those who wish to blame a single leaer for the actions of everyone even on the fringes of communication. There was no telephone. There was no telegraph there. There was no way other than sending someone with a message on horseback with a message that became outdated immediately after he left to Cedar City on towards SLC without any immediate new information about the changing, fluid, dynamic, volatile situation. BY got the news in time to pray about and if he received an answer or decided what to do even other than what we have heard up until today which was let them pass and likely keep the peace no rider could have made it back intime for the message to save lives.

  • Richard
    July 20, 2008 1:32 p.m.

    To "Historian:

    You are incorrect with your rebuttal against me concerning the knocking down of fences. I was glad to make an essay out of my posting but we are limited to only a few words to make our comments. The Arkansans DID knock down fences rather than go around a 1000 acre plot of land homesteaded by Mormons because it was much easier than scouting out an alternate route and whoever was the last through the fence likely didn't care to set it back up since they were not in the U.S. any more at the time and the Mormon laws couldd not possibly pertain to them since they were not Mormon and had no respect for them. Only a couple of children died as the history shows the children SURVIVORS were kept in Mormon households for years until the state was brought into the U.S> shortly following the death of Brigham Young. The poisoning of water holes is a fact of past that even today some Paiutes will still speak of through descendancy and how their Mormon neighbors witnessed it as well. The son of the chief at the time was a brave that died from it.

  • Anonymous
    July 20, 2008 1:19 p.m.

    I am sad for those whom reject any accountability by the Church and your leaders. Instead of accountabilty all I hear is the testimonies. This is very troubling and very sad people, very sad.!

  • Medical help need....
    July 20, 2008 1:11 p.m.

    Its not the LDS church that is full of hate. It is the people who seek to find something magnificent in this tragedy, and make a senseless issue out of this Massacre. The MMM is something that no longer exists nor should affect anyone living today. It is just another historical event Gone with the wind.

    What is wrong with you sick people who dwell on this tragedy day in and day out. What are you proving to others by filling and consuming your lives with so much hate? This tragedy has absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with any living person today. You angry people out there who dwell on the MMM, with this kind of hate need some serious psychiatric help. The kinds of hate you people are expressing on here are not normal by any means. Hate and dwelling on hate is much more evil than the MMM that happened 150 years ago.
    Let this rest now!

  • yawn
    July 20, 2008 12:38 p.m.

    another in depth look into the Mountains Meadows Massacre. As horrible as this is, it's getting old.

  • Lisa
    July 20, 2008 11:14 a.m.

    TO Historian on the Outside

    There is nothing in any LDS church vault that you may think there is. And if there were some sort of evidence in the churches vault I'm certain it would have been destroyed a long time ago. You are dreaming, buddy. Nothing in that church vault but membership records and genealogy. At least as far as I know. No MMM records for you to ponder. SORRY!

  • Historians Outside
    July 20, 2008 10:53 a.m.

    Until Historians outside the faith who can truly be seen as not having an agenda and then compare their conclusions with the present LDS authors conclusions, there will always be suspicion that something is still being covered up. OPEN THE VAULTS. There is no reason to not let any credible historian study anything the church has in its possession. Let detractors spew whatever and let people make an honest decision for themselves who is telling the truth.

  • Let it rest
    July 20, 2008 10:41 a.m.

    Nobody living today should shove the blame to any one person. No one really knows what happened at the Mountains Meadows Massacre 150 years ago--none of us were there. We can only guess, and imagine in our minds, and wonder why it happened? There are many, many theories why it happened and they are only theories.

    It has always puzzled me how so many good Mormon men could have done such a horrific thing, but I was not there to witness it, so I do not know the answer. It is best to let this rest and forgive.

    History is full of strange events and much worse.

  • RBC
    July 20, 2008 8:51 a.m.

    As a life long member of the church I think there are a number of lessons we as members can learn. First, we must not diefy our church leaders. They are nothing more than men with important callings. As men we should expect them to make mistakes. If we do we probably won't be dissappointed. And second, we must never be guilty of blind obedience. We alone will answer for our actions. It's not going to fly on judgement day when we try to tell our creator that "the bishop made me do it". MMM happened because a bunch of members showed blind obedience to some very misguided church leaders. Hopefully we'll learn from our past mistakes and it will never happen again. In the mean time, as a member, I along with others, feel a collective guilt. Even though we were never there.

  • Ernie
    July 20, 2008 8:52 a.m.

    Here is the paradox. It seems that the some of the early Saints and especially some of their leaders were terribly wrong in their actions. Yet their fruits that are left for us are most perfect I am talking about the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints.

    I have attended many churchs. While I have met many wonderful people of different faiths, I can't find the same spirit in their church or teachings. As a Mormon I watch humble, loving, unpaid members run a church that teaches it's members to strive to live their lives like Christ did. I can only come to one conclusion. Even if early Mormons made mistakes, the Church is true.

    If someone provided me the best world's evidence that the Church wasn't true, I would still want to be part of it. It is the most perfect institution on earth. The MMM was a tragedy. So is the effort by many of you to try and destroy something as wonderful as the LDS Church.

  • Anonymous
    July 20, 2008 8:22 a.m.


    If you are "forgiving" as a form of revenge, is it really forgiveness?

  • John Lee
    July 20, 2008 8:22 a.m.

    I think the person commenting as Get Over It is closer to the truth of this matter than the authors.

    It's so easy to sensationalize this story to the readers or to those who would potentially buy this book. What you anti mormons and conspiracy theorists want to hear is that the Mormon church did this. The order came from the top. These are the same as those commenting like Todd C. The only truth in it is that the LDS leadership at that time said to the people of the Utah Territory, prepare to defend yourselves. The people were well warned to be on the lookout for mobs and militias to follow. They were to get prepared for even an invasion of the US military and these people were ready to kill any invaders.

    Imagine if you were driving around Provo late on a Saturday night and came upon a big wild keg party were alcohol was being served. You went in and saw the Second Counselor and the Ward Clerk drinking a beer. You write about it with the title "Provo Fourth Ward Organizes Beer Party". It's a damnable lie to sensationalize a story with half truths.

  • Eric
    July 20, 2008 7:54 a.m.

    The thing I am disgusted with is that the Mormon haters, and sadly, the authors of this book, try to tie this massacre so tightly to the church. The truth is that these people who organized the battle just so happened to also be LOCAL LDS leadership acting in their official roles as civil leaders. In a war time, when those involved in carrying out the massacre were on a very high level of alert looking to defend their families and their way of life from others that they believed were coming to harm them, this wagon train wandered into the Iron County Military District. Yes, although you might reject this outright, the book could have told the story in only a few pages by giving some historical background and then closing with - "The Fancher-Baker wagon train was just in the wrong place at the wrong time." It's the same as so many other massacres long forgotten to history. We often think of indians as we have seen it portrayed in the movies. A group of people wanders into an area where the local people feel scared or threatened and a battle ensues. When one side dominates, it's massacre.

  • Anonymous
    July 20, 2008 7:41 a.m.

    To those who impatiently say to "move on" and "the past is past":

    "What is past is not dead; it is not even past. If we cut ourselves off from it, we prefer to live as strangers." -- David O. McKay

  • Rorschach
    July 20, 2008 7:01 a.m.

    To Ridgerunner,

    I will be patient with your ignorance and naivete. There IS evidence of a coverup. That is not being invented. In addition to the evidence of a coverup, there are ALSO many documents that are missing. We know this because these documents are mentioned and sometimes quoted in other documents that we DO have, but when we look in the journals, records, and files, specific, targeted pieces of history that we KNOW should exist, have been removed and possibly destroyed!

    I think you are projecting your OWN desperate need to justify your beliefs onto others. So desperate are you to justify your feelings of self-righteousness and moral superiority that you will even stoop to making misleading comments and unsupported attacks on objective facts and the people who espouse them.

    What does that say about you?

  • Loretta
    July 20, 2008 3:55 a.m.

    Sin happens. Even in Zion.

    Yes, sin. Not faults and failings. Not a lapse in judgment. Not just criminal acts. Sin.

    Where is absolution to be found?

    Perhaps another example is in order. Listen to what the Holy Father said at the Catholic Youth Conference this week. Apologize yet again for the abuses of the past, and it will make no difference to those who still choose to hate.

    The surest form of revenge is to forgive your enemy totally.

  • Friend
    July 20, 2008 1:58 a.m.

    I am glad to see this volume coming out, and the care that has been taken to provide as much information about the events as possible.

  • MMM facts and criticism
    July 20, 2008 1:26 a.m.

    Someone else had to help John D. Lee murder those 100+ people. No way one man could do it all. By this understanding of the basic facts we can infer that there were other perpetrators involved. Furthermore, these others were involved in the actions and the cover-up.

    Yes, there was a cover-up, as only one man was ever convicted of these murders and the others got away. So we can all agree a cover-up occurred.

    Some think the main question is whether or not LDS leadership, Brigham etc. was involved by ordering the actions and cover-up. To me this doesn't really matter. I'm sure if BY didn't order it, the anti's won't believe it. And if BY did order it, any evidence has most likely been destroyed long ago.

    We have heard a vow of secrecy prayer was conducted after the incident, led by J.D. Lee. Was this done under the color of religion? If this can be verified as truthful, then this fact would be more damning to the Church than BY's involvement.

    The the main criticism of Mormonism is... how could the self claimed only true church, be true if it could be involved in such a massacre?

  • Ridgerunner
    July 20, 2008 12:28 a.m.

    Some of you are amusing to me. You invent a conspiracy (B.Y. involement in MMM) and when there is no evidence, you claim it is a coverup! If someone is objective in their investigation you say they are prejudiced and their research can't be trusted. To some of us,it seems you are angry because there is no evidence! But you so desperately need evidence to justify your irrational hatred of the man and his religion. What does that say about you?

  • Re;Fools
    July 20, 2008 12:09 a.m.

    wow! you sound so angry! No need to be insulting and calling me a hypocrite! You don't even know me.
    Your point about faith saving us from,"what"? We are all going to die. And even though you have no faith of this, we will be judged according to our faith and works.Science will not be there to help. Won't even be a factor.

    Policies change with the times but revelations don't. Never has a revelation changed doctrine. Policies, yes, but never doctrine. Plenty of example in the Bible. Peter received a revelation chaging the policy of the early church toward prosleyting gentiles.

    Word of wisdom: you have to understand that in 1833 no one knew about the dangers of tobacco or alcohol. Go ask your doctor (science) about the health benefits of the W of W.(food fad?) Or if you don't believe him, you smoke a pack of Camels everyday or swill a 6 pack each day and see what it does to your health.
    Sorry you are so angry! I am not really a hypocrite by the way! Nor have I called you any degrading names.

  • San Diego
    July 20, 2008 12:03 a.m.

    I remember participating in Boy Scout activities on the Mountain Meadow ranch in the 1950s. It has taken years for me to receive the full impact of what happened there.

    It honestly makes me think twice about rushing to limit the human rights of minority groups in California who did nothing more wrong than be born into this world with a same-sex affinity.

  • Words have meaning
    July 20, 2008 12:03 a.m.

    But words can be intrepreted to mean something completely different.

    A little exercise to see if we can find the truth about a simple sentence.

    I never said she stole the money.

    Easy to understand. But put emphasis on each of the words seperately.

    "I" never said she stole the money. Some one else said it.

    I "never" said she stole the money. Flat denial.

    I never "said" she stole the money. I enferred or wrote that.

    I never said "she" stole the money. Someone else stole it.

    I never said she "stole" the money. It was givent to her, or she borrowed it.

    I never said she stole the "money". She stole something else.

    Any one can get any meaning out of the bool they are looking for, depending on how they interpret it. This book wikk NEVER give anyone answers that their bias' are already looking for.

    Keep trying.

    Like I said before, while we on earth search for answers, the guilty parties have already been judged and dealt with.

    As for me, I will spend my time trying to do something positive with my life.

  • Dear Mormon Bashers,
    July 19, 2008 11:59 p.m.

    Okay, Mormons committed the MMM... so what? A South Korean killed over 30 people at Virginia Tech last year. Should we now hold all South Koreans responsible for his actions? I'm a convert to the Church of about 15 years now, so I really have absolutely no ties to what happened at the MMM. So why do so many of you Mormon-haters insist on dragging me and every other Mormon through the mud for this event that none of us were alive for and that all of us condemn? The perpetrators were Mormon... so what?

  • Doug in Louisiana
    July 19, 2008 11:20 p.m.

    Looks like these men are trying to make a best seller, and a lot of money. Bet the book has a big charge to it. Evey person has a idea. Will they give this book free, NO, all for the money. I will not have the time for it. Can I tell you about my family in the 1800, not much only a name and date maybe. I can make up a good story on them but is it true.

  • Janette
    July 19, 2008 11:18 p.m.

    Hello BOB,
    It's a true tragedy for some of us LDS descendants of the perpetrators that were there during the massacre. Please don't blame the Journalist for reporting on this, It is their right to do so. And, I really doubt that you were around watching the tragedy of 150 years ago, or have any true knowledge of it, or the so called killers, to go and spout off anything you didn't witness with your own two eyes.

  • TO just apply to mormons
    July 19, 2008 10:59 p.m.

    You said:

    Aren't we supposed forgive and forget?
    OR does that just apply to mormons?


    So you're saying that Hauns Mill, the Extermination Order and the sending of Johnson's Army are never brought up by Mormons? LOL. You are a very funny person.

    Mormons never pass up an opportunity to remind everyone how their ancestors were "wronged." The Fancher party should at least should get the same option.

    Whether it be 18 Mormons in Missouri or 120+ Arkansans in So. Utah or milliions of Jews in Europe. The truth needs to be told AND RETOLD-- so it never happens again.

  • Larry
    July 19, 2008 10:42 p.m.

    I don't think I could ever accept that Brigham Young didn't have something to do with the MMM. In my opinion he most definitely did know what was going on with MMM. I also cannot accept Brigham Young as a prophet of god, he was a fallen prophet. All he prophets after Brigham are true prophets. One prophet has nothing to do with the calling of the next, but god does have something to do with it. Brigham Young did not stop God from calling another man in the church to become a true prophet.

  • Bob
    July 19, 2008 10:28 p.m.

    How is this an LDS tragey? Talk about some journalistic spin. The LDS were not killed, rather they were the killers.

  • history
    July 19, 2008 10:08 p.m.

    it seems LDS had some darkest shadows in the past,with poligamy and masacre.anyway,its not fair to punish LDS ,let by gone be by gone.we are not here to live for yesterday.lets read the book as a history to add to our knowleges.As i see it,MORMON people mostly good people.they have GOD in their daily life,i think thats more than enough.lets lead a simple life,then we'll all have a peacefull mind.i am not LDS,i am CATHOLIC.we are all children of GOD.lets look forward to the future with bright hope.GOD IS FORGIVING!

  • Stanley K. J.
    July 19, 2008 9:45 p.m.

    I cannot understand why the Indians are getting off on this that they had nothing to do with the m.m. massacre. OF COURSE THEY DID! Brigham Young even said they took part in the m.m.m.. We all know that the Indians hated the white man invading their land. AND the Arkansas wagon train HATED MORMONS! Good grief! It's obvious what happened. There was a lot of provoking going on from the Arkansan people and the Indians just let them have it. The Indians could care less if any of them were woman or children.

  • Re: To John 8:33
    July 19, 2008 9:02 p.m.

    And where do you think Brigham Young got all the money to accomplish nice homes for himself and all his many wives, and economically build the church, as you say? GEEZE! he got it from hard working Latter Day Saints. Give the LDS saints some credit! I believe Brigham Young covered his foot prints backwards and re-wrote and destroyed want he want to on the Mountain Meadows Massacre history event.

  • Scotty
    July 19, 2008 8:58 p.m.

    "The Mountain Meadows Massacre" written by Juanita Brooks has long been considered the benchmark book on this subject. Brooks points out much evidence documenting the involvement of Indians in the MMM, from the get go. It must be remembered that in southern Utah, Indians outnumbered white settlers four to one in 1857.

    I do not believe the Indians were simply puppets in the hands of local Mormons in Cedar City, as many today would have us believe. If anything, it was more the other way around.

    There is much reason to believe that Indians played a major role in the MMM. This should not be ignored or discounted simply for PC reasons. Facts are facts, PC or not.

  • Janice R.
    July 19, 2008 8:44 p.m.

    Mr. R. Turley is just stirring the pot once again. This is not going anywhere. Mr. Turley should have just left this alone and to rest with history. Besides LDS church members are bias on who to blame.

    Lets just leave at this; Brigham Young made a huge mistake and shifted the blame to his follower John D. Lee and other loyal LDS members within the church. He did this to save the church, otherwise the LDS church would have been demolished and dissembled!

  • To John
    July 19, 2008 8:33 p.m.


    In my opinion, the Church would be absolutely nuts to try to cover up something like Brigham Young's hand in the MMM. He accomplished more for a church and it's people economically over a short period - than anyone to date Even if he was deceitful, he wasn't stupid and an emotional decision maker. The whole MMM was a mess up with over zealous people letting emotion take over.

    The MMM project has been a multi-year project involving extremely bright, independent minded scholars, who made it clear upfront that they were going to be objective regardless. The truth always set us free. Cover-ups destroy organizations in time.

  • D. Michael Bass
    July 19, 2008 8:33 p.m.

    Ernest T.,

    So far you have failed to show in any of your posts that FARMS "spin" or North Temple "spin" (as you would have it) is any different from your own pontificating. In other words, I might just as freely assert that you are the spin-doctor.

    Implicit in your repeated accusations of "spin" is the hubristic notion that you are somehow a paragon of objectivity. If you really are such a paragon, I'm sure you'll do us all the courtesy of furnishing some evidence of it.

    And btw- it's "prerogative," not "perogitive"

  • washCO
    July 19, 2008 8:34 p.m.

    Catholic priests are being prosecuted almost every day for crimes against children. Does this mean Catholics are bad? No, There are good people and bad people every where. Get over it. Remember this was over 150 years ago. Any thing else bad happen in the last 150 years?????

  • banderson
    July 19, 2008 8:02 p.m.

    As an LDS missionary in the Mexican desert in 1965 I was on my own to make some critical decisions which affected all the missionaries in Mexico. We had no phone. The mission president was hundreds of miles away. He didn't know what was happening until after the fact.

    The MMM happened 100 years earlier in the Utah desert hundreds of miles from BY in SLC--days away by horseback. They didn't have cars or cellphones. They couldn't call up Brigham for advice. It's a totally different context than today. Yes, LDS members follow the Prophet, but we're not robots.

    I understand, the local Mormon militia leaders, charged with the job of defending the Mormon settlers from harm, did what they thought was proper at the moment. They were very wrong. Their followers followed--They shouldn't have. I've never understood why the followers did not say, "Wait! This is not right!" Maybe the book will say.

    This week the State of Missouri honored General Doniphan for a life of service, including his refusing to obey a direct military order to execute Joseph Smith. Very few defended the Mormons back then especially in Missouri. Mormons were to be exterminated. Good for Doniphan!

  • awesomeron
    July 19, 2008 7:52 p.m.

    I understand that this is one of the sadder moments of Mormon History. However you cannot change History. Say sorry and move on. None of the people alive today had anything to do with that invent, although I assume some people would be close Relatives. No one now alive is to blame. About a year or so ago there was a TV Docudrama about this incident and quite a stir on my little Island to discredit it. I caught part of the first installment and changed the station mostly because it was A. Meaningless and B. Boring. I think I would feel the same about the book. The White Settlers did some nasty stuff, however so did the Mexicans and the Indians when they got the chance. History notes that they from time to time where not kind to one another noting that lets move on. Lots to Reach and Gospel to Teach.

  • JayCee
    July 19, 2008 7:34 p.m.

    Certainly the masssacre was outrageus and indefensible, but why are the even more outrageous and indefensible actions of the people in Arkansas, Missouri, Illinois and other states against Mormons never mentioned. I don't remember hearing any apologies from them.

  • Bryce Clark
    July 19, 2008 7:26 p.m.

    Looking at the behavior of Joseph Smith or Brigham Young in order to determine if the church is true is a far more complicated exercise than simply reading a few blog entries or even reading a few books. There are many areas to look at, the histories, favorable, and unfavorable, the Church and its teachings, the work left by these men from the Book of Mormon to other institutions and practices established, and many, many other bits and pieces of "evidence". It is the totality of all of these things and not anecdotes or instances of reported behavior. But the main issue that members and non-members have when discussing these things is that I, as a member, base my truth determinations regarding the Church on weighing all of this evidence PLUS spiritual or inner experiences I have had and that is not something that can be weighed or measured, and non-members are looking a the church with a much more analytical or academic point of view. Ultimately we're speaking a different language. What this book seems to be is an attempt to bridge that gap - but I'll have to wait to read it.

  • There was a cover up
    July 19, 2008 7:06 p.m.

    The simple fact that 127 people were murdered with about 70 people perpetrators and with only one person (the wrong person) being brought to justice with many local church leaders involved indicates a massive cover up. Given the very tight control that BY had over the territory it is not much of a stretch to think he had knowledge of the people involved. That much is not really disputable. Make your own conclusions...

    BTW, other books on the subject do not have the possibility of a conflict of interest, ie., they are not written by church employees/members.

  • Mark
    July 19, 2008 7:04 p.m.

    Rich: So you think BY was involved in Joseph's murder? Right on, bro! I have it from a credible source that Brigham Young was also involved in the Kennedy and King assassinations in the 60's, and set in motion the events leading to 9/11.

  • Elisabeth
    July 19, 2008 7:01 p.m.

    Well, I can't help but notice that this history is still devoid of a perspective from the Native Americans for whom the killing was blamed. These "seemingly good" 'ol boya and gals were willing not only to kill in cold blood, but to allow their community's cultural prejudices attribute the blame to totally innocent "neighbors." I think it is adminrable that members of the LDS church are confronting this and lifting the self-imposed ban on free-speech, free-thought and free-flow of information, but wouldn't it be even better if they collaborated with the other victims; the falsely blamed. There are plenty of native american scholars that would be more than happy to provide their culture's interpretation of this shared history. Try googling Forrest S. Cuch. While this may be a good account of church history, it is still tragically ethnocentric.

  • MHP
    July 19, 2008 6:52 p.m.

    Oh for "Heck" sake. Read the book, Read the Book, read the book. Then JUDGE.

    lET'S TAKE A POLL HERE, 1, We move on or 2, we whine. I vote to move on.

  • Matt
    July 19, 2008 6:42 p.m.

    Juanita Brooks' book on the subject has to be the best at putting the whole sad affair in context as she came from down in that area and had access to the people and records of those involved. I don't see how anyone will ever write a better account of this tragic event and the revisionists of the 21st century are left to only speculate as all those involved have passed on. But as Mrs. Brooks established in her book the world was a different place on the frontier of the 1850s in a very remote Southern Utah, with a Federal Army marching towards it to put down the perceived "Mormon Rebellion" and survival a daily struggle against famine, flood, and illness the people of Southern Utah were on edge to say the least. While innocent in the context of nobody words justify there murder, the Fancher party didn't do itself any favors but stirring up the feelings of the locals and Piute and nobody has ever proven they did not "stir the pot." It should have never happened and those who were involved will have to answer for their actions. Sometimes excessive stress leads to very tragic decisions; regrettable.

  • A few points
    July 19, 2008 6:37 p.m.

    1. It is beyond doubt that Brigham Young was a very controlling, gruff man. Read any number of his talks in the JofD and you will quickly get a feel for his style. Spencer W. Kimball he was not. It is hard to deny that he was NOT a good leader for a people that were already fearful and persecuted - his personality only took that to a whole new level.

    2. Don't forget how long it took for information to travel between SLC and S. Utah at that time. It's not like BY could just send a text or jump on the phone to his leaders in S. Utah.

    3. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young at least claimed to have constant communication with God. I suppose if you believed that it would have been extra incentive to "blindly follow" the prophet. But for many years Church leaders haven't even pretended to that kind of personal revelation or communication and yet members STILL blindly follow. I don't remember the last time a general authority - let alone prophet - even insinuated they had a visit with the Lord. And yet we follow without thinking just the same.

  • Re: Fredd
    July 19, 2008 6:14 p.m.

    You have way too much "faith" in science. Science isn't always knowledge because what science "knows" is always changing with new discoveries. All science is incomplete (including DNA science). Science is also often missued (junk science). Above all else,God requires our faith. Science does not produce salvation, faith does! The difference you have with those who have faith is that we believe there are more kinds of knowledge than science produces; revelation. For example,the word of wisdom (revelation) is years ahead of science and science is only beginning to catch up! Some of us don't have enough time (life is too short) to wait that long! So we lean heavily on our faith in the revelations. Plus all real science will eventually agree with revelations. I can't wait until science cathes up with the Lord's revelations about how He created the universe! How does science explain it? Big Bang theory! Now that takes LOTS of faith!

  • TO mormon attackers
    July 19, 2008 5:54 p.m.

    Aren't we supposed forgive and forget?

    OR does that just apply to mormons?

  • Kyle
    July 19, 2008 5:53 p.m.

    Yawn.... Yawn....

    Hash and rehash, It always seems that the past is more important that what occurs in the present. Those Spanish inquisitions were fairly brutal if not worse. I don't see any crying about that. Why? It happened in the past.

    Learn from the past, Live in the present!!

  • JC
    July 19, 2008 5:43 p.m.

    Brevet Major J. H. Carleton, U.S.A.
    May 25, 1859

    "The Mormons say the children were in the hands of the Indians and were purchased by them for rifles, blankets, etc., but the children say they have never lived with the Indians at all. The Mormons claimed of Dr. Forney sums of money, varying from $200 to $400, for attending them when sick, for feeding and clothing them, and for nourishing the infants from the time when they assumed to have purchased them from the Indians."

    "Murders of the parents and despoilers of their property, these Mormons, rather these relentless, incarnate fiends, dared even to come forward and claim payment for having kept these little ones barely alive; these helpless orphans whom they themselves had already robbed of their natural protectors and support. Has there ever been an act which at all equaled this devilish hardihood in more than devilish effrontery? Never, but one; and even then the price was but "30 pieces of silver.""

  • Anonymous
    July 19, 2008 5:44 p.m.

    I wouldn't waste a one cent on purchasing and reading this book. From reading this article, again and again, as history speaks, excuses for the truth. Religion or not, men of God would not do this, war time or not, true men of God would not do this and then cover it up and let one man pay the price.

  • Kar
    July 19, 2008 5:27 p.m.

    The church has no hidden records. Brigham Young made sure of that. Why do you think they collect the history from members.

  • History is history
    July 19, 2008 5:10 p.m.

    I am not worried about the MMM and who ordered it.

    I am concerned with the mindset which caused a group of people to believe the action was justified. Even more of a worry: does that mindset still exist today? Are members ready to kill again?

  • Mark
    July 19, 2008 5:04 p.m.

    Several have asked why it such an important story.

    Look closely, we've got a persecuted religious sect preparing for warfare and mobs with the U.S. Army driving at them across the plains, with pioneers and a murdered religious leader and strange reformation-style radical theology and zealotry and fear of persecution and American indians on the warpath and a weak and slightly whacko U.S. President...

    It's just one heckuva story!

  • Anonymous
    July 19, 2008 4:51 p.m.

    To A thinker,

    You disgrace the moniker you use. Think again.

    The MMM was not a quick, impulsive, knee-jerk reaction. It was a complex, deliberately-planned military-like battle plan that took several days to concoct and carry out.

    And it didn't happen in Cedar City.

    Do you even know what planet you are on?

  • Jim Didericksen
    July 19, 2008 4:43 p.m.

    The major problem with those who are so quick to defend Brigham Young is that they over look the convenient pages of diaries which seem to directly address that issue, which had been cut out of the documents of which Mr. Turley admits is a mystery. Moreover, there missing letters and other documents which others, at the time, claim to have read or seen, which are also missing. Doesn't that raise some sort of a red flag. If Brigham Young was so completely innocent, why would someone go to the effort to remove and destroy documents? As Mr Bagley indicates, the missing evidence speaks so loudly that it is hard to ignore. So, to those who jump to the defense of Brigham Young, please explain those types of seemingly incriminating actions by someone or groups of individuals who seemed to be worried about what evidence those documents may provide or indicate. Those sort of actions seem to have been designed to protect someone, otherwise the question remains as to why.

  • kenny
    July 19, 2008 4:34 p.m.

    Back then Utah was still part of the wild wild west.People took the law in to their own hands and settled problems with their neighbors with the bullet.People like you and me carried guns and they probably used them more than we think.We were still a lawless society if you compare it to todays standards weither you were mormon or not.Yes there may be evidence some day that would point out a coverup by LDS church leaders but I dont think that would suggest that the church its self did a coverup.We need to separate the ways of the church from the ways of the people.Even a prophet is with sin and so are his followers.MMM was sad.Latter day saints doing bad things.God will judge them for the crimes.

  • Anonymous
    July 19, 2008 4:21 p.m.

    Mormons have a real images problem with both how theye perceive themselves and how they woul like other people to perceive them. With all the iamage problem the mormons have I would have to assess that the church is in some real trouble.

  • A thinker
    July 19, 2008 4:07 p.m.

    What happened back in Ceder City oh so many years ago happened in such a short time when peoples temper roared, that had any one sought BY's council on the matter one way or the other they didn't have time for an answer.
    The didn't have cell phones back then and it was a a hard three day ride on horseback just one way. Perhaps the Indians sent a smoke signal!!

  • Ernest T. Bass
    July 19, 2008 4:03 p.m.

    D. Michael:
    If want to believe there is no spin coming from North Temple or FARMS that is certainly your perogitive but you're extremely naive if you believe it doesn't happen.

  • zoar
    July 19, 2008 4:01 p.m.

    No man is perfect but the principles as revealed through the Lord to Joseph Smith are true nothing changes that. All Churches have things in their past that were not appropriate behavior. The Inquisition and the Crusades are just two things that come to mind. Only Christ was perfect and he did tell us that the whole need no physician but those who are sick.

  • Mike
    July 19, 2008 3:55 p.m.

    Several on here have made very unsubstantiated declarations that Brigham Young Had "complete control over the LDS Church" and that he was totally involved because "he was the churches (sic) leader" and that he definitely knew what was going to happen and approved it.

    Prove it or shut up!!

  • Anonymous
    July 19, 2008 3:58 p.m.

    They should let this one die. The mormons have so many PR problems right now it has do be very embarrassing. Membership is already in a steep decline and these types of articles and publications will only hurt it further.

  • D. Michael Bass
    July 19, 2008 3:44 p.m.

    Ernest T.,

    "Spin" is a leitmotif of your posts: FARMS spins, the LDS Church spins, etc., etc.

    You are rather generous with your unsubstantiated tautologies. Unfortunately (or fortunately) they don't prove anything.

  • KM
    July 19, 2008 3:31 p.m.

    Some ask why the church doesn't open its records so they can find out what really happend?
    Funny, that without the church records the anti-mormons would know litte or nothing about the history of the church.
    Also funny that its the only history they are interested in knowing. forget the Book of Mormon and the other latter-day scriptures, the only thing they are looking for is a club to beat the church over the head with - and they are looking for the club in the churches own closet.
    For me, I can only be humbled by the trials that BY went through, and the leadership he exibited.
    Where he goes in the eternities, there I would like to go also.

  • Tad
    July 19, 2008 3:20 p.m.

    It is not the mormons who are to blame, it is the federal goverment for interfering in deseret [utah] national rights. utah was given to the mormons by God to build up zion, the same as isreal; it is the gentiles who have come into the land of the mormons who are to blame for everything bad.

  • Kyle
    July 19, 2008 3:12 p.m.

    Here's a little story

    "I was once wronged
    then I forgave.
    The end"

  • Anonymous
    July 19, 2008 3:05 p.m.

    I recently visited MMM memorial site with my ward youth. The story that the YMs President read said that Brigham Young sent word to not meddle with the immigrants. He told them to leave them alone. Even though the immigrants were from missuri and were claiming they had the gun that killed Joeseph smith and were doing other things like that to rile the mormons up... Then the my YMs president said that even though they were mormons and generely good people, they still messed up and killed innocent people. Sin can take any one if they let it.

  • Whoops
    July 19, 2008 2:14 p.m.

    We can not understand nor can the authors convey, life 150 years ago. Personally, I have always wondered, given the occupation and attack of Utah by the United States during this time, why every single wagon train of these invaders was not massacred. It is a remarkable demonstration of restraint by any standard. And, because of this the one event stands out in stark contrast. We view the center piece and forget the landscape.

    As to why, the church and it leaders didn't publicized it-it can never be known. But, a foreign army on the hill firing off a canon every morning may be some of the context.

  • Fredd
    July 19, 2008 2:10 p.m.

    The issue many Mormons on this board don't understand is that we, non-Mormons, look at the behavior of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young (and those around them) to see eveidence they were men of God. It influences our thoughts on whether your church is true or not. In MMM we have a very clearincident in which to judge early Mormon behavior. For over a hundred years the official church story was it was done by Indians with an unknown amount of influence from local Mormons. Now we know it was a completely led Mormon plot to steral and plunder and MURDER women and children. What was Brigham's influence? At a minimum he created an atmosphere that led an entire town of Mormons to conspire and plot or two weeks to murder WOMEN and CHILDREN and these settlers thought that would please Brigham. At a maximum he ordered it. But because of the massive cover-up orchestrated by Brigham and continued for over a 100 years we'll never know his full involvement. We do know he didn't seem to remorseful when he uttered his "vengance is mine, and I have taken it" comment. I'm not 100% accurate, but you get the point.

  • Yep
    July 19, 2008 2:06 p.m.

    The real problem is organized religion in general.

    Prophets are people. People do and say odd things.

    Scriptures are written by people, not God.

    Death, pain, destruction, all in the name of God.

  • Alex
    July 19, 2008 1:35 p.m.

    I guess the lesson learned on this issue for me is that I will not reply on the counsels of my Stake President or Bishop on anything. If I have a doctrinal question about some idea that a Stake President or Bishop proposes then I'm going to go to the General Authorities for the mind/will of the Lord. Going to a Stake President could get me in trouble like happened to the murderer - participants at Mountain Meadow.

  • Claire
    July 19, 2008 1:19 p.m.

    Please stop all this!! It happened. It was terrible. Inocent people died, I know. But please: put an end. How many mormons died? Lost their houses? How many mormon women were raped? Are we going to look back over and over? Another book? How much money are the authors going to earn with it?
    The church is growing and well. Be happy and forget.

  • anon
    July 19, 2008 1:06 p.m.

    Let the authors publish their work, read it and make your own decisions afterwards, then get on with your life and hope nobody researches it later and has to write all the details good or negative remembered by other people to satisy someone elses need to know all the stuff you left out when you talked about your life. Yes, MMM was a very bad incident, the Church has apologized, what more do people need and want? It's over with, does yammering it to death make it better or make it go away? It happened! A very long time ago! It wasn't a good thing! 911 happened but somehow that was a flicker in our PRESENT that we do know the details about and most people have already chosen to forget.

  • World History
    July 19, 2008 12:51 p.m.

    Go check your World History books, and you will see how difficult it is pinning down any history. No one will ever know for sure what really happened at MMM, except those that were there.

    Everyone, do all your posturing, suppose this or that, but those who are responsible have probably already been dealt with.

    Use it to fuel whatever your needs are.

    I also think in those history books you will find many cases where religion has been an issue in wars, attacks, and other things negative.

    Too many people have been killed in God's name, I'm sure he's not happy about it, and has a way with dealing with it.

  • Phil
    July 19, 2008 12:48 p.m.

    Maybe this group of travelers deserved what they got at the hands of members of a certain church and Indians? Maybe the Indians did all the killing. Maybe the Indians who did the killing need a monument to their actions.

  • Rick
    July 19, 2008 12:44 p.m.

    Did every catholic pedophile priest commit his horrific criminal act with the knowledge and permission of the pope? No, well then there is no reason to believe that B.Y. was personally involved in this action. Read "No man knows my history" and you will see that Mormons were sometimes, even according to Anti-mormon literature, innocent victims so when they reacted in a panicked outrageous fashion remember that past behavior by lds-enemies unfortunately did have something to do with the actions of the mormons, unfortunately in this case to innocent victims.

    For a real shocker, read when the Extermination Order was lifted in Missouri. Yes, it was but a very very short few years ago.

    Reality, mormons came into towns and improved the land without the help that non-mormons expected would be asked (for a price of course.) This independence self-contained group angered people since they already had eggs in their baskets from the gains they expected. When this didn't take place they ran the mormons out and grabbed the improved land. Ah, but many of you chose to ignore those facts.

    Me, I'm not mormon but do enjoy history.

  • Shawn
    July 19, 2008 12:43 p.m.

    It's easy to see the forest for the trees if you want to, but history is a process of creation as I have been taught in my history pedagogy classes and people who dig for certain bones always find them whether they represent what they think they do or not. Assuming that anyone who has a complex view of history is simply ignorant is simply ignorant as present circumstances show in the everyday lives of people we see on the news and all around us. "History" is an action and a reflection of the soul to seek either bitterness and division or understading and I hope that those who are so sure of themselves about how history unfolded investigate their motives and self-assuring beliefs just as the LDS characters are post-humesly asked here. It's not as bald faced as many would like to believe it is even as critics waiting hourly in great faith that the faith of others is false. I understand why people might think that Brigham Young was a corrupt man, but again, I believe it is missinformation and I am to be as honored and respected for my belief as any other.

  • Ernest T. Bass
    July 19, 2008 12:40 p.m.

    What did Young say on his first visit to the site?
    Is that in the book? If so, how did they spin it?

  • This is not about LDS or not LDS
    July 19, 2008 12:36 p.m.

    My country lived a dark time under a military power for a long time, now young people talks about that and hate some of them and they werent born that time, I wish we can look forward thinking to do things better.
    About MMM, I think is time to heal, if you are LDS or Not, 'cause here in Utah, you are mormon or you hate mormons, that's so stupid...THERE IS A TIME WHEN GOD WILL TAKE CHARGE, WITH JUSTICE...HIS JUSTICE.
    We must heal, and remember the way you judge other, you will be judge in the same way.
    Everyone of us will be judge, LDS OR NOT, be prepared for that time.
    For now, forgive, be forgiven, and youll find peace.

  • Iron-ic County Utah
    July 19, 2008 12:23 p.m.

    MMM was a result of religious bigotry and blind obedience to authority.

    The same horrible things are happening still, with ignorant LDS exercising religious bigorty and blind obedience to authority in discriminating against other American citizens in their right to marry whom they want.

    Ironic for a group who claims they were subjected to religious persecution to now turn around and use their religion to persecute gay and lesbian people!

    How absolutely ironic! And hypocritical!

  • Hubbard
    July 19, 2008 12:16 p.m.

    It is hard to follow the logic of some of the TBMs who post on this site, they profess how they love the Lord and their church but they have no respect or hunger for truth. How can you love God and not love and want truth. And two wrongs do not make one right, because other churchs have done terrible things is not an excuse for mormons to copy them. The devil does all terrible things, so is that our excuse.

  • CB
    July 19, 2008 11:58 a.m.

    Glad the book is dedicated to the 'victims' because I see all involved as victims, and fortunately it is the Lord who will judge, not a group of historians or bloggers.
    Anybody happen to read the Old Testament lately, seems the Lord had the Israelites kill every living creature to cleanse the land, their downfall came when they didn't obey His edict.
    I wouldn't even dare, even after a few days, to try to judge what caused this all to happen. Those involved may have had deep seated experiences we couldn't even imagine from their days in Missouri and Illinois, and still the others deep seated hatred and suspicion for things taught by their ministers and clergy about the Mormons. It was volatile and it caught fire. Amen!

  • Uncle Bud
    July 19, 2008 11:48 a.m.

    Wake up people, of course Brigham ordered it. Why do you think the US Army was coming to Utah ? Because of Brighams tight fisted control.

  • Daniel D.
    July 19, 2008 11:41 a.m.

    Well said, Fredd. I couldn't agree more.

  • bob carlisle
    July 19, 2008 11:31 a.m.

    "finally" a book that tells everyone what we already know about the massacre. the lds church has said for years that some members in southern utah massacred a group of people. it was not ordered by the heads of the church or by god. this falls in line with the book. so yes thank you for wasting my time

  • D. Michael Bass
    July 19, 2008 11:21 a.m.

    Uh-oh! Here we go again . . .

    Anybody else tired of this retread discussion?

  • James
    July 19, 2008 11:21 a.m.

    To Historian
    I don't think you have all your historian facts straight either. Perhaps you need to go back a study the event(MMM) a bit closer. You are very bias in what you say for some reason or another. I also believe Brigham Young was involved. Some historians don't deserve to be called historians.

  • Bill
    July 19, 2008 11:17 a.m.

    The most serious blunder made by the Fancher Party was to allow the "missouri wildcats" to accompany them through Utah, thus unwittingly providing cover for those vermin. Without the "wildcats", the outcome would have been completely different.

    Conspiracy theorists like to have one person to blame. I'm sorry to disappoint them but Brigham Young, with all his warts, did not order the massacre.

    Thanks to the "wildcats", the settlers perceived the threat to be more than it was and, sadly, reacted to their misperception with horrible consequences. They will certainly pay the price for their tragic error in judgment.

    At this point, the best we can do is understand what happened and why. Information provided by the researchers in their forthcoming book will provide the best answers available at this time. We owe them our gratitude.

  • Henry Drummond
    July 19, 2008 11:06 a.m.

    I think it is difficult for any institution to "investigate itself". I'm sure there will be no shortage of people who will dismiss this book, unread, for just that reason. While such a book will have a point of view that needs to be kept in mind, it should not be dismissed out of hand. It does represent progress.

    As the authors pointed out nobody alive today had anything to do with the killing. People alive today have had a lot to do with disparaging the memory of those who were killed insisting that somehow the immigrants "were asking for it" and whose conduct brought this on themselves. I'm glad to see the Church repudiating that view as well as the view that this was the work of the Indians.

    I also appreciate the fact that the authors acknowledge that relevant information has been withheld in the vault of the First Presidency for decades. There are other relevant documents including the letter that local leaders sent to Brigham Young asking for advice that have disappeared along with several diary entries of people with knowledge of the event. It would be interesting to know if they still exist.

  • Historian
    July 19, 2008 10:48 a.m.

    Annie and Richard, it was interesting to see your postings one after the other, because your comments are representative of the two extremes of misinformation on the history of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Annie, Brigham Young did not have complete control over the members of the LDS Church. John D. Lee was only nine years younger than Young and was one of dozens of men "adopted" into Young's spiritual family in a practice that many Latter-day Saints briefly followed at the time. Many men "adopted" other men (as heads of families)during that period. Historical evidence clearly shows that many, many Latter-day Saints did not support Young and went against his counsel throughout his tenure.

    On the other hand, Richard, historical evidence shows that the Arkansas emigrants did not go through the territory knocking down fences and poisoning water holes. Even if they did, does that justify the murder of 120 men, women and children?

  • Sam the Lamanite
    July 19, 2008 10:39 a.m.

    Whether or not Young delivered the order to murder in the MMM is not entirely clear. what is clear is that he wanted their livestock stolen before they were massacred and he led a massive cover up after the deed took place. It is good to see the church attempt to close the book on this dreadful chapter once again... yet hard to believe it took so long to release the records they have been hiding.

  • Kerry
    July 19, 2008 10:36 a.m.

    A religious group like the Mormons just don't set out and massacre a group of people for no reason at all. Something happened back then that has not been told. I think the wagon train egged it all on. Those Arkansans people were BIG Mormon haters of the worst kind, as I have read history too. I would like to know who truly took the first shot? I believe Brigham Young had a strong hand in the M-M-Massacre--NO DOUBT!

  • Tragedy?
    July 19, 2008 10:29 a.m.

    Will the press ever tire of that word? They use it for every possible circumstance.

    Try "atrocity" -- a much more appropriate when describing what happened at Mountain Meadows.

  • Fredd
    July 19, 2008 10:22 a.m.

    Joseph Smith warned against, "zeal without knowledge." Yet today if you bring up knowledge, archeology, genetics etc members say they have "faith". They don't need science. Science is knowledge. Every TBM on these boards who says they have faith and don't need science is practising "zeal without knowledge" and would be the type of person to participate in an MMM.

  • John
    July 19, 2008 10:21 a.m.

    Of course the church will cover for Brigham Young's hand in the MOUNTAIN'S MEADOWS MASSACRE, because he was the churches leader. The church cannot let a dark side be known or cast on this so called prophet. What ashame to hide the truth.

  • Let's learn and move on!!
    July 19, 2008 10:10 a.m.

    I'm very interested in reading this book. This tragedy does not seem to really be about mormonism at all, rather about human beings in circumstances of extreme stress and fear. Had these men truly followed the principles taught by the LDS religion, none of this would have happened. We're all human, regardless of the religion we claim. Maybe there are lessons we can ALL learn from a tragedy such as this, then let's move on and be better people because of it.

  • Richard
    July 19, 2008 10:01 a.m.

    I have done extensive research on this topic in college and believe that putting out yet another book is more like a few authors attempt to get some certain notoriety and money rather than finding "astonishing new evidence only found here". The massacre was a tragedy and continues to be a scar in the settlers' past throughout the entire area from AZ through WY and wherever someone hears about it elsewhere when missionaries are trying to bring their message and someone has recently read this new book but never really understands persecution or the social climate of a few settlers having to choose between the surrounding tribal neighbors trying to live peacably when others of their race come through knocking down fences and poisoning tribal waterholes ending in the deaths of several people before the massacre ever happened. I would think it not very smart to brag about dirty deeds one had done to Mormons when crossing their lands knocking down fences and making their neighbvors angry who already didn't trust their kind. We will not understand the dynamics of the social situation exactly ever so stop stirring the pot for money or notoriety. Everything coming out now is hypothetical.

  • Annie
    July 19, 2008 10:00 a.m.

    Brigham Young was one tough man and he had complete control over the LDS church. He was in my opinion most definitely involved! Let's get this right and not shove the entire blame on Brigham Young's adopted son John D. Lee and the rest of those hard working LDS pioneers, who also all supported Brigham Young completely.

  • Hoss
    July 19, 2008 9:59 a.m.

    Where are the winners?

    I only see groups of mostly good people, except for one, with needs that sometimes compete.

    1,There are the descendants and relatives of the victims who would like their kin recognized as ordinary decent people who didnt deserve the treatment they received.

    2.There are the relatives and descendants of the perpetrators, participants and actors who feel a need to defend the reputations of their family heritage and to minimize this stain.

    3.There is the need of church leadership to protect itself and the general church membership from the decades of significant and unjustified physical, legal, financial, verbal and social assaults.

    4There is the general membership who wants the world to understand this event in the context of the historical settings.

    5.There are the bigoted ardent opponents to the church who could care less if Brigham Young was involved or not. They are only seeking for issues to continue their quest to destroy the church as an organization and people. Any anomaly will do, real or contrived, as they have an agenda that is much bigger than the issue at hand and have no interest in the truth or fairness.

  • What happens? What if?
    July 19, 2008 9:49 a.m.

    Even after exhaustive research, some will still not see the light. Not because it's not there, but because they refuse to. If one refuses to believe regardless of the amount of irrefutable evidence presented, the only ones who are edified by it are those who choose to believe it.

    No amount of evidence, support, documentation or substantiation will ever provide enough "proof" to someone who is so steeped in their hate for any thing to convince them otherwise. They will stand in the sunlight and deny its existence.

    But we believe in free agency to let them choose to believe/disbelieve what they will. Yet, with free agency comes responsibility and an accounting will be required at some point. There may or may not be more to learn on this subject, but it is a beg step for the Church to admit some culpability, take the heat and move on positively. All men are fallible. Only God and His Church are not.

    Let the past - and the hate - go. Forgive men their trespasses. God will take care of the rest.

  • lynn in TN
    July 19, 2008 9:48 a.m.

    Thank you. May this be the final word. Excellent scholarship for all to peruse.

  • Todd C.
    July 19, 2008 9:42 a.m.

    Even if Brigham Young did not directly order the massacre, he certainly covered it up and certainly FAILED to manage and control official local leaders of his Church. At very least, he was guilty of a coverup and guilty of NEGLIGENCE as the Chief Officer of the Church at that time.

    More importantly, the local leaders explicitly claimed they were acting under what they considered to be orders from Church headquarters! They sincerely believed they were carrying out God's will as it came to them through the Prophet and the Church chain of command! Most of them (especially John D. Lee) were sickened by what they thought they were being asked to do, but they exercised faith in their leaders -- looking back we can call it blind and murderous faith, but at the time, they thought they were being truly faithful!

    How different is that to the blind faith Church members are expected to exercise in trying fight against same-sex marriage?

    No matter how you look at it, the idea of following your local (or general) Church leaders without question is DANGEROUS! How many more people's lives must be destroyed before Latter-day Saints learn that important lesson?!

  • finally
    July 19, 2008 9:44 a.m.

    Does anyone really think that things are different now than they were then? Things are still being covered up. Not by the church but by the men! Not by the devil but by men! Not by the good men but by the bad men. And it should stop!

    "It is the nature and disposition of : 'almost all men'" as it is written in the D. and C. "as soon as they get a little authority...they begin to exercize unrighteous dominion over their fellow men.

    What men do does not change one whit the gospel of Jesus Christ. It does give one pause however. Why are men so greedy, selfish, power hungry? Especially those in positions of power in governments, business or churchs.

    Please don't blame it on the devil.

    Blame it on the mother in law if you want but not the devil.

  • Jon
    July 19, 2008 9:31 a.m.

    I think it sounds like a fascinating book. I intend to read it before making up my mind about this subject. I particularly liked Barlow's comment about the Church being comprised of normal humanity, trying to respond to the Divine, rather than being Divine in and of itself (with a few warts and wrinkles or course). I certainly have never felt divine, but I have tried to respond to the Divine to the best of my ability.

  • Simple
    July 19, 2008 9:23 a.m.

    Brigham Young and the members of the LDS church were paranoid, and that is why the massacre happened. Nothing more to be said.

  • Kip Meacham
    July 19, 2008 9:25 a.m.

    From the article's conclusion: "[Ron] Walker said he's come to see the massacre as a cautionary tale in making judgments about those who are different.

    ""It's a primer to teach us about humility and long-suffering. ... It's a case-study in how not to apply religion and how one should apply true religion in one's own life," he said."

    From the looks of the comments so far, I think Walker's conclusion hits the nail on the head.

  • A new era
    July 19, 2008 9:20 a.m.

    I hope that this book and the Joseph Smith papers truly begin a new era of honesty for the Church. It may result in some lost testimonies that have been built on a very different version of our history. But it will move us into a future of new testimonies built upon truth. Built upon a different origin and history than many of us learned in seminary and our living rooms but at least an honest one. I forsee my grandchildren in an LDS Church that emphasizes the atonement and the Savior with much less emphasis on our origins and early teachings of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young which can be so problematic and confusing.

  • wicked
    July 19, 2008 9:17 a.m.

    I can't help but think of the catholic church leaders and what they did in their time as spirtual leaders not only these two christion sects - pretty wicked . What makes these HUMANS think they are exempt ? All will be known when it is over. Now to search for a human who is PERFECT and still on earth.

  • Timothy E.
    July 19, 2008 9:14 a.m.

    I hope the LDS church doesn't cover Brigham Young's tracks in his involvement in the Mountains Meadows massacre, so there can be peace for all and the blame not shoved completely to just the men involved. I really dislike cowards.Nevertheless, I will by the book. I hope to find that it has been written truthfully and not cowardly.

  • wicked
    July 19, 2008 9:10 a.m.

    I can't help but think of the cathlick church leaders and what they did in their time as spirtual leaders not only these two christion sects - pretty wicked . What makes these HUMANS think they are exempt ? All will be known when it is over. Now to search for a human who is PERFECT and still on earth.

  • arc
    July 19, 2008 9:12 a.m.

    What happens..

    People have been looking for over a hundred years to find evidence Brigham ordered the attack. No one, even the biggest critics of the church have found any concrete evidence.

    These 3 were told to find and write the truth. It is obvious that they are telling what they believe to be true. People on both sides have distorted the truth over the years. It is refreshing to see what they have written. Some previews have been made public, and they have been very, very interesting to read.

    What is interesting is the modivations of what happened. Utah was at war with the federal government. Mistakes were made. People were killed. The real tragedy was the massacre itself was a local cover-up. It was bad enough for the initial shooting, but the rounding up and killing most of the rest was the worst part.

    The only reason to bring this up, after so many years, in my opinion, is to learn from the past. These were asked to help for us to do that.

    Too many other writers have had one or two reasons for writing. Defend or tear down the church. Lets move past that.

  • Rich
    July 19, 2008 9:11 a.m.

    This was a very good article...I have been a member for over 11yrs now and since I have learned about the tragedy, I have felt that Brigham did have something to do with this. I also believe that Brigham had something to do with Jospeh murder too. Brigham did a lot of damage to the church. Granted he was able to get people out west but that is about all good he did...

  • Robert
    July 19, 2008 9:09 a.m.

    I look forward to reading the book next month. Much credit should go to Juanita Brooks, the first author to research the Mountain Meadows events and write a credible history of it. Much of what she wrote has since been updated, but the basic story she told is the foundation for all later history, including the one that is the subject of this story.

    One part of the modern story could have been covered in this article, but wasn't: how the modern church has changed its attitude toward the massacre and allowed its historians to use heretofore protected documents. This article refers to the newly released documents as coming from "the first presidency's vault", but does not tell us how they came to be released. Juanita Brooks mentioned in the forward of her book that Presidents McKay and Clarke would not allow her to review them, and criticized them for it. But things have changed, obviously, and why they have changed, as well as the discussions between today's church leadership that have brought the new documents to light, would make a very interesting story, one that everyone could learn from.

  • A reminding friend
    July 19, 2008 9:09 a.m.

    "What happens...", please remember that YEARS of research went into this book, and it is VERY well documented so anybody will be able to discover the truth about this subject. Of course there will be those who will not accept the truth and continue to spread lies, so yes, many may call this a "cover up." But I know Richard Turley well enough to know that he is an especially honest man, and his hard work has uncovered some sad things, but nothing that implicates Brigham Young ordered the massacre. Read the book yourself, research the given evidence, and pass the suggestion on to those others who make immediate judgment without knowledge.

  • To Jason
    July 19, 2008 9:05 a.m.

    Sounds like what you are saying is that the mormon church is your church right or wrong. So what if it is just plain old the wrong church do you still stay with it no matter what.

  • Leslie
    July 19, 2008 9:01 a.m.

    I am looking forward to reading this book. I had an ancestor who may have been involved in the massacre, and I have also heard from many old timers who have said an believed Brigham Young was involved in the massacre. Will we ever learn the truth?

  • interested
    July 19, 2008 8:52 a.m.

    this is new to me,i am not LDS.but i am interested to know more about the story.i want to know what the reasons behind the cruel massacre?why nobody dare to stand up and speak the truth?i cant wait to read the book.

  • Gentile
    July 19, 2008 8:00 a.m.

    To the Bush-Wacking, Back-Stabbing, Lying, Mormon Cult-ure; we don't get mad, we get even!

  • history nut
    July 19, 2008 7:57 a.m.

    "What happens" is correct. The biggest mistake these authors made was not to include a reputable non-LDS western history scholar on this project. The fact that the project spent millions that could only have been authorized by the most senior LDS officials will just heighten the suspicion.

    It will be interesting to see if the scholarly history journals even review it.

  • Pete
    July 19, 2008 7:56 a.m.

    The "church" finally admitted their involvement in the massacre and they apologized. Clearing the names of the Indian tribes they blamed. It is a time to heal and a time to move forward. But, this new evidence begs what other information that "has never before been available to researchers" is in the archives owned by the LDS church, and will they allow others researchers examine it?

  • Carlsons
    July 19, 2008 7:54 a.m.

    Our family is grateful to these researchers.

    They are a much more trustworthy source than several who have published their interpretations in the past.

    We look forward to the book.

  • tragedy???
    July 19, 2008 7:49 a.m.

    how about 'slaughter'?

  • Get Over It.
    July 19, 2008 7:46 a.m.

    Yeah, and the Catholics, Baptists, Muslims, Adventists, Methodists, etc. never had an a handful of drunk, vengeful wild men (like Lee) in their congregations?

    Yeah, and so these religions never had anyone in their groups seek revenge toward people who might have been part of mobs who ran them out of their home a couple of years earlier?

    Yeah, and what are the REAL MOTIVES of the authors of this book? Are they not doing on white pages to the Mormon Church what the Missouri mobs did a couple year's earlier to Lee's friends and relatives? A term comes to mind: "Gotcha' journalism" for a few days of fame and a few sheckles.

  • Ricki
    July 19, 2008 7:47 a.m.

    Seriously...get over it and pop your Mormon bubble. It is insane to me that the LDS spend so much time working out every single detail of their past. It is what it is. It can't be changed. Different authors using different words can't change what happened... so get over it. Scripture tells me that our Heavenly Father could care less about yesterday. His concern is for your today and the plans He has for your tomorrow - to give you a hope and a future.

    July 19, 2008 7:42 a.m.

    The devil made them do it!!!!

  • Objective
    July 19, 2008 7:39 a.m.

    As objective as this book seems to be, there will never be a full answer. It looks like people who had recently been persecuted perceived a threat and resorted to a preemptive attack before attempting diplomacy. We weren't there, we don't understand what persecution and murder of family and friends can do to our emotions, and we will struggle to understand irrational behavior. I wait to read the comments of those who will impose today's understanding on a 150 year old event, and conclude that a coverup continues.

  • Cats
    July 19, 2008 7:30 a.m.

    People can speculate all they want that Brigham Young was involve with the massacre, but the fact is that the evidence just ISN'T THERE! In fact, it is just the opposite.

    Of course, it was a terrible tragedy and those involved have a lot to answer for. However, this thing didn't happen in a vaccuum. There were a lot of surrounding circumstances and factors that lead the terrible decision that these pioneers made.

    The whole thing is so sad, but I hope the descendants of this groups can finally move on and get over this.

    The bottom line is that the Church leadership in Salt Lake, including Brigham Young, had nothing to do with this. It was the actions of a few frightened, misguided individuals in Southern Utah.

    I hope we all can move on now.

  • Stop the self-flagellation
    July 19, 2008 7:24 a.m.

    Enough of the self-flagellation! It's like Mormons are being to write Communist style confessions over and over again about what terrible people we are because our persecuted ancestors finally hit back.

    Yes, they tried to cover it up. No, they didn't do it again...unlike the mobs in Illinois and Missouri. It was a mistake, not a sign of the character of the people.

    Let it rest.

  • Wilford
    July 19, 2008 7:15 a.m.

    Anyone who has studied utah mormon history has learned that BY's hands are not all clean of the MMM. Why all the white wash, why not open the church records to true indepentend researchers for writting of an accurate account of history. The last time the church did so Fawn M. Brodie was able to produce historical information that was helpful in revealing mormon history. It is like the mormon church thinks it can get to heaven on a carpet of lies. They are as bad, or worse than the washington polititions. Where is God in all of this.

  • Brigham's Culpability
    July 19, 2008 7:09 a.m.

    About the issue of Brigham Young's role:
    I think that to some people, Brigham Young will always be the ultimate culprit. Others wouldn't want to admit it, no matter what.

    I myself think that, although he was a prophet, he also was a human being, and, being far removed from the center, his ability to anticipate what would ensue can be a subject for speculation. We can't know the emotions he had; did they cloud his reasoning or prevent him from paying attention to more or less subtle warnings? We can't know for sure.

    I want to read the book and digest it. It's encouraging to me that there is a strong commitment to honesty at the highest levels of the Church.

    And, as humans, we must be able to learn to forgive. I live in a country that has been run over by aggressive neighbors, but I don't hold our current neighbors responsible for the acts of their forbears. Bearing grudges and harboring thoughts of revenge never did anybody any good.

  • Camp Grant Massacre
    July 19, 2008 7:04 a.m.

    The historians say that in the 19th century the MMM was used as a club to try and injure and destroy the church. Nothing has changed.

    Watch as the enemies of the church start pouring venom into these comments, as seen already in the second comment. I certainly won't be watching. I will be entirely ignoring the comments. If I want to know more, I'll read the book and not the comments.

    There is no excuse for the MMM. An explanation, perhaps, but not an excuse.

    There is also no reason to continue using MMM as a club any more than we need to use the Camp Grant Massacre as a club against the government of Tucson, AZ. After all, over 100 innocent women and children were killed by a mob led by a mayor of Tucson. The city government must be trying to cover up its involvement in that massacre.

    Let's force the government of Tucson to issue a yearly apology for the Camp Grant Massacre.

    July 19, 2008 6:53 a.m.

    GOD made them do it!!!!

  • Did Brigham Young sin? Yes!
    July 19, 2008 6:54 a.m.

    What happens,

    "if they find evidence that positively reveals that Brigham Young directly ordered the massacre?"

    Then they will publish it. It would be good for the Church, its member and the public to know all the facts regardless of who is to blame.

    "What will the Church do? What will the membership do?"

    We will add one more thing to the list of sins and weaknesses of Brigham Young who is not perfect and who lived in his time. Now, if there is ever proof that God is the one who ordered Young to order the massacre we might have serious doctrinal issues to deal with since we teach that God is perfect and therefore he wouldn't order a massacre of innocent people.

    "What if they find evidence indicating only a cover-up?"

    Then they will add that to the list instead of an actual ordering of the massacre by general Church leaders.

    "Even if no evidence is found that implicates Brigham Young then the public may think this is all just a modern day cover up sponsored by the church."

    The public can think whatever it wants but it also needs to meet its burden of proof.

  • Anonymous
    July 19, 2008 6:48 a.m.

    I personally know Rick Turley and have been aware of his involvement on this project for the past five years. This book was supposed to be finished a long time ago, but the authors found more information than they ever anticipated and it kept pushing back the publication date.

    I'm very anxious to finally read their book. I know that they have gone to GREAT LENGTHS to research every detail and undoubtably this will be the most comprehensive account ever written.

  • Ron in Texas
    July 19, 2008 6:43 a.m.

    Replying to What happens..., it has been known for some time (by fair-minded historians) that Brigham Young did not order the massacre. What this article stated is that his wartime, bellicose language contributed to the environment that led to the decision by local leaders to carry out the massacre. And that's nothing new. And its a timely warning for us all. We know that Brigham said a lot of things during his lifetime that were not inspired. We can't claim he never said them. Truth is what it is. As a lifelong member, and one who loves history, I'm glad the book was written with the cooperation and encouragement of the First Presidency. Being honest about past mistakes is not going to harm us today. No enemy will be persuaded, perhaps, but no friend will be repulsed.

  • What happens
    July 19, 2008 6:16 a.m.

    For everyone not dedicated to finding fault with the Church ... life will go right on.
    Most will continue to live the best lives they can, repent, forgive, try to follow the Savior.
    It's not our place to judge. The Lord knows.
    MMM is not a stain on anyone living today, and on only a very few back then.
    Like all mistakes made by other mortals, it's not worth obsessing about.

  • Ed
    July 19, 2008 5:26 a.m.

    As a foreign born missionary called to serve in California, I remember how shocked I was after learning for the first time of this tragedy from my companion from Southern Utah. What I also felt was tragic was the line he took of "They had it coming". He would have pulled the trigger too and followed the line of authority as he saw it. Very sad. The top leadership of the Church may not have been involved before the massacre but logic says they must have got involved with "protection" afterwards with only one person being punished.

  • Re: What happens...
    July 19, 2008 5:17 a.m.

    They've already discovered that there is absolutely no evidence that Brigham Young directly ordered the massacre, and in fact a lot of evidence that points to the idea that he tried to stop it, but didn't reach them in time. There are multiple journal accounts and stories passed down through the generations by the messenger sent to SLC to ask BY whether or not they should go through with the massacre, and BY's reply to the horrified negative, and also similar stories told by BY's maid and others.

    The idea that he possibly helped to cover up the crimes is another story. They are still researching that aspect of it, and what they may find may be troubling to some members of the church. I certainly don't know how I'd feel about it, learning that a president of the church helped cover up a massacre. Unfortunately, much of the evidence is not something we, as normal people researching online or in the library, can find. But these professional researchers are finding it, and eventually, we'll know the truth of that part as well, whatever it may be.

  • Again and again
    July 19, 2008 4:59 a.m.

    This book will no doubt stir up the exact same debate every previous book on the subject has stirred up before. Some will argue one point, others will argue another point.

    Then, in a short time, everyone will move on and get back to other questions of history, such as who really shot JFK, did Elvis really die in 1977, was Monticello just an 18th century version of the Playboy Mansion, and of course, did George Washington really cut down that cherry tree?

  • To What happens.... 12:56
    July 19, 2008 4:39 a.m.

    If Will Bagley couldn't find a "smoking gun" what makes you think any legitimate historian?

    I agree it's a no win situation. But at least the LDS Church is doing what they can to acknowledge what happened.

    Of course, I know some people won't be satisfied until President Monson holds a news conference and says, "OK, We admit it! Brigham Young ordered the MMM. Now we will everyone please form a line so we can start handing out the checks."

  • Jason
    July 19, 2008 1:32 a.m.

    As I've looked into this horrible and unjustified event in LDS history, I've contemplated what it would be like at the judgement seat, when we all stand in front of our Maker and give an accounting of our lives. Those involved in this event will have this opportunity just like everyone else. They will answer to the n'th degree, UNLESS they take advantage of the Lord's atonement. There is no escaping justice for mercy cannot rob justice. Repentance is their only hope as it is with us all.

    Many who have angst against the church have looked at this event with over-zealous outrage, and have used it to further their goal of humiliating the members. Anyone who would try to sweep this event under the rug for fear of it ruining testimonies or causing people to question the truthfulness of the church are without faith. I fully understand the weakness of men, the influence of satan, and the holes we dig for ourselves. This is the very purpose of the Atonement and it isn't our place to judge. For you conspiracy theorists who want to denigrate the church, I say you are no better than the Mountain Massacre men.

  • What happens....
    July 19, 2008 12:56 a.m.

    if they find evidence that positively reveals that Brigham Young directly ordered the massacre?

    What will the Church do? What will the membership do?

    What if they find evidence indicating only a cover-up?

    Even if no evidence is found that implicates Brigham Young then the public may think this is all just a modern day cover up sponsored by the church.

    Its a no win situation.

  • Chuckles55
    July 19, 2008 12:40 a.m.

    My wife and I recently visited the massacre site and were pleased to see the recently dedicated monument. We also went to the hill overlooking the valley where we read the names of those who were the victims and looked through the siting tubes to see both the site of the siege and of the massacre. Later, we went to Lees Ferry and saw where John D. Lee lived in hiding until he was arrested, incarcerated and later shot as the only person ever convicted of any crime in the massacre. I am looking forward to reading the first book and the follow-on volumes.