Jump to content

Dan Peterson's Letter To Editor Re: MMM


smac97

Recommended Posts

Here:

MALIGNING MORMONS

REGARDING FRED BARNES's profile of actor Jon Voight ("Hollywood Witness," September 3), apart from the overwhelming consensus of critics that September Dawn, in which Voight stars, is a pathetic excuse for a movie, there are several other points that should be made about its misrepresentation of history.

The so-called Mountain Meadows Massacre is in no substantial way parallel to the attacks of 9/11. Speaking as a professor of Islamic studies and Arabic at Brigham Young University, there is no real resemblance between Mormons, even in the nineteenth century, and adherents of Wahhabi Islam.

At least one of the pivotal and most damning statements put in the mouth of Brigham Young by the scriptwriter of September Dawn appears to have been entirely invented by an anti-Mormon just a few years ago. It is not only "the church" that denies Brigham Young's alleged role in ordering and masterminding the massacre; no credible professional historian appears to believe it either--for the clear and sufficient reason that there is no evidence to support the charge. In fact, there is considerable reason to reject it. September Dawn is a disgrace, a piece of shameless anti-Mormon propaganda. Fortunately, it appears destined to disappear without leaving much of a trace behind.

DANIEL PETERSON

Provo, Utah

Hmm. I wonder to what "pivotal" and "damning" statement he refers.

I wonder.

By the way, I think the article by Fred Barnes to which he refers is this one. A few choice bits:

The fanatical Mormons who believed God justified the killing of men, women, and children were "very reflective of Wahabbis" who teach hatred of non-Muslims and claim God approves the murder of infidels. "This is a way to examine the anatomy of religious fanatics [and how they] rationalize a murderous act."

...

It's also a controversial way. Mormons are unhappy with September Dawn because it implicates church patriarch Brigham Young. The Mormon church denies Young ordered the massacre. Voight, however, says the evidence against Young is unassailable and the film's director, Christopher Cain, told the Los Angeles Times that "Young's dialogue was taken directly from speeches and documents."

-Smac

-Smac

Link to comment

Fred Barnes does his best to keep the lie alive.

It is not only "the church" that denies Brigham Young's alleged role in ordering and masterminding the massacre; no credible professional historian appears to believe it either--for the clear and sufficient reason that there is no evidence to support the charge.

"Credible professional historian" - ouch, that must hurt, Bagley.

Link to comment

I think the article by Fred Barnes to which he refers is this one. A few choice bits:

â??The fanatical Mormons who believed God justified the killing of men, women, and children were "very reflective of Wahabbis" who teach hatred of non-Muslims and claim God approves the murder of infidels. "This is a way to examine the anatomy of religious fanatics [and how they] rationalize a murderous act."

...

â??It's also a controversial way. Mormons are unhappy with September Dawn because it implicates church patriarch Brigham Young. The Mormon church denies Young ordered the massacre. Voight, however, says the evidence against Young is unassailable and the film's director, Christopher Cain, told the Los Angeles Times that "Young's dialogue was taken directly from speeches and documents."

Religious fanaticism is ultimately caused by religious prejudice. Religious prejudice is essentially a derogatory opinion based on inaccurate or incomplete information and/or irrational thinking. One good way to fight religious prejudice is to avoid making accusations based on historical research performed by movie actors

Link to comment

Fred Barnes does his best to keep the lie alive.

"Credible professional historian" - ouch, that must hurt, Bagley.

Actually it wasn't Bagley, who discovered the evidences first.

When you read the Juanita Brooks' book you come away with an unmistakable feeling where the idea of extermination originated.

And a quote from Mr. DP's Letter to the Editor;

The so-called Mountain Meadows Massacre

It really didn't happen, it is a pigment of mass imagination by Mormon haters.

Link to comment

More random thoughts, solo?

Actually it wasn't Bagley, who discovered the evidences first.

Never said that. What are you referring to? Did you misunderstand something?

When you read the Juanita Brooks' book you come away with an unmistakable feeling where the idea of extermination originated.

That's nice.

And a quote from Mr. DP's Letter to the Editor;

It really didn't happen, it is a pigment of mass imagination by Mormon haters.

Have you looked at the dictionary definition of the phrase "so-called"? And why did you assume that DCP meant that it didn't really occur - when the primary definition of so-called is "called or designated thus"? Surely you're not claiming that DCP is claiming it didn't happen - are you?

Link to comment

More random thoughts, solo?

no, they are rather precise, for ones who are willing to understand

Have you looked at the dictionary definition of the phrase "so-called"? And why did you assume that DCP meant that it didn't really occur - when the primary definition of so-called is "called or designated thus"? Surely you're not claiming that DCP is claiming it didn't happen - are you?

You have noo idea how familiar this phrase sounds to me (I"ve heard it all my life, in fact).

Actually I don't think DCP is claiming it didn't happen, he just trivializes it.

Link to comment
You have noo idea how familiar this phrase sounds to me (I"ve heard it all my life, in fact).

Actually I don't think DCP is claiming it didn't happen, he just trivializes it.

Well, you didn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling that you knew what "so-called" means - especially the way DCP was using it, when you characterized it sarcastically as a "pigment[sic] of mass imagination".

So, now the tack you take is that DCP is trivializing it. Amazing. You take some real liberties in reading things into other people's statements. Your preconceived antagonism towards the Church is really clouding your thinking.

Link to comment

You have noo idea how familiar this phrase sounds to me (I"ve heard it all my life, in fact).

Actually I don't think DCP is claiming it didn't happen, he just trivializes it.

The producers of September Dawn created a movie with lies, misstatements, and distortions.

That is what trivializes their death, makes a mockery of the terrible events of that day ==> cheap exploitation by hate mongers.

And Dan is simply pointing that out.

Link to comment

The producers of September Dawn created a movie with lies, misstatements, and distortions.

That is what trivializes their death, makes a mockery of the terrible events of that day ==> cheap exploitation by hate mongers.

And Dan is simply pointing that out.

You did not see the movie, did you?

If you have seen the movie, the killings were depicted soft, merciful nonviolent way as compared to what happened in reality.

The Holywood, no doubt, embelished, Brigham Young & local leaders to make money but it happened and those people died.

Why just prolong a simple apology, like Eyring did, Oaks in Whitney interview acknowledged.

No sane person blames any LDS Church Leader or member what happened 150yrs ago. What people resent is (was) the lack of emphaty, humility.

You tell me after reading entire speech of GBH 1999 MMM ceremony, was there any apology? He said; "Our being here should not be construed as admission of guilt". Is this how Jesus would respond after a tragedy?

Link to comment

"You did not see the movie, did you?

If you have seen the movie, the killings were depicted soft, merciful nonviolent way as compared to what happened in reality.

The Holywood, no doubt, embelished, Brigham Young & local leaders to make money but it happened and those people died.

Why just prolong a simple apology, like Eyring did, Oaks in Whitney interview acknowledged.

No sane person blames any LDS Church Leader or member what happened 150yrs ago. What people resent is (was) the lack of emphaty, humility.

You tell me after reading entire speech of GBH 1999 MMM ceremony, was there any apology? He said; "Our being here should not be construed as admission of guilt". Is this how Jesus would respond after a tragedy?"

Are you for real? What a load of crap. This is one of the most offensive statements about the MMM I have ever seen. As if slow motion prolonged executions of the immigrants in a movie is in some way soft and merciful and non violent. Are you on some sort of medication?

The church does not appologize because Brigham Young was not involved. He ordered the immigrants left alone. Local members of the church, not unlike countless other local members of other churches involved in massacres and far worse crimes against humanity, were the perpetrators. Not the church.

Link to comment

"You did not see the movie, did you?

If you have seen the movie, the killings were depicted soft, merciful nonviolent way as compared to what happened in reality.

The Holywood, no doubt, embelished, Brigham Young & local leaders to make money but it happened and those people died.

Why just prolong a simple apology, like Eyring did, Oaks in Whitney interview acknowledged.

No sane person blames any LDS Church Leader or member what happened 150yrs ago. What people resent is (was) the lack of emphaty, humility.

You tell me after reading entire speech of GBH 1999 MMM ceremony, was there any apology? He said; "Our being here should not be construed as admission of guilt". Is this how Jesus would respond after a tragedy?"

Are you for real? What a load of crap. This is one of the most offensive statements about the MMM I have ever seen. As if slow motion prolonged executions of the immigrants in a movie is in some way soft and merciful and non violent. Are you on some sort of medication?

The church does not appologize because Brigham Young was not involved. He ordered the immigrants left alone. Local members of the church, not unlike countless other local members of other churches involved in massacres and far worse crimes against humanity, were the perpetrators. Not the church.

Sounds like you are wery well informed about MMM, (which seems to be next to nothing).

Your response shows that you are actually not interested about finding truth. (which I do not blame you, because it would be all lies).

But try it anyways; Start from reading the best sources;

-Read 2 books of Juanita Brooks One is about MMM other is a bio of Lee.

-Read the confessions of perpetrators

-including John D Lee. This man actually disarmed emigrant group for the promise of a 'SAFE PASSAGE".

And ask yourself how this man's priesthood and all other covenants have been restored.

After doing all this you imagine that we are going to a house of an investigator who will want to be baptised.

He/She hears yours story or mine first and decides.

What will she decide.

I can put my house/business and everything I earned that she will not side with you.

For simple reason that you lack humility and your pride prevents you to put this awful erpisode behind you.

I am very glad Eyring took the right step to heal wounds.

Link to comment

You did not see the movie, did you?

Have you actually been keeping up with the posts here? If so, you would realize that your question is very silly. Several who have seen the movie have given their comments, reviews of the movie, and the writer and those involved in the movie itself have been interviewed and their comments were posted here, as well as the trailer.

If you have seen the movie, the killings were depicted soft, merciful nonviolent way as compared to what happened in reality.

That's nice, but that is a very minor point relative to the rest of the movie and its depiction of Mormonism, and the leaders of the church.

The Holywood, no doubt, embelished, Brigham Young & local leaders

Embellished is an interesting word. I prefer lie, mistated, distorted. Hate mongering.

For example, the "prayers" of the Mormons, the "statements" of BY. This is not embellishment, this is hatemongering in its lowest form.

to make money but it happened and those people died.

Yes, they did. And the hate mongers dishonored their death with a callous depiction of the events of their deaths in order to make money. With no intention of honoring their memory with the truth.

Why just prolong a simple apology, like Eyring did, Oaks in Whitney interview acknowledged.

No sane person blames any LDS Church Leader or member what happened 150yrs ago. What people resent is (was) the lack of emphaty, humility.

You tell me after reading entire speech of GBH 1999 MMM ceremony, was there any apology? He said; "Our being here should not be construed as admission of guilt". Is this how Jesus would respond after a tragedy?

Read the posts. That has been discussed in detail. The "church" was not responsible for their deaths, the local leaders who were Mormon bear sole responsibility.

What would Jesus do? He would tell the truth -- the church was not responsible for their deaths. Individuals, acting against counsel and *specific instructions* of the church, were responsible.

Link to comment
You tell me after reading entire speech of GBH 1999 MMM ceremony, was there any apology? He said; "Our being here should not be construed as admission of guilt". Is this how Jesus would respond after a tragedy?

Jesus would apologize and admit guilt?????

This is, by far, one of the more bizarre things you've said.

Link to comment

cdowis

Read the posts. That has been discussed in detail. The "church" was not responsible for their deaths, the local leaders who were Mormon bear sole responsibility.

What would Jesus do? He would tell the truth -- the church was not responsible for their deaths. Individuals, acting against counsel and *specific instructions* of the church, were responsible

cdowis

great response. Don't be surprised if missionary conversion rates go down next to nothing.

The arrogant behavior will be approportionate to the results you will get.

You guys do a great job. Keep at it.

Link to comment
great response. Don't be surprised if missionary conversion rates go down next to nothing.

The arrogant behavior will be approportionate to the results you will get.

You guys do a great job. Keep at it.

Solo have you been impervious to the entire last months responses to this film. The verdict is already out on this film or did you somehow miss the memo. The condemning wasn't even done by Mormons but by anyone who could see through the films agenda. Those involved in the film have had to resort to libeling the church to get their ev target audience to go out and see it. They are an embarrasment. Do you really want to go down with this ship?

Believe me you are only damaging your own credibility by defending this junk.

Link to comment

cdowis

Read the posts. That has been discussed in detail. The "church" was not responsible for their deaths, the local leaders who were Mormon bear sole responsibility.

What would Jesus do? He would tell the truth -- the church was not responsible for their deaths. Individuals, acting against counsel and *specific instructions* of the church, were responsible

cdowis

great response. Don't be surprised if missionary conversion rates go down next to nothing.

The arrogant behavior will be approportionate to the results you will get.

You guys do a great job. Keep at it.

What is arrogant about not apologizing for something you arent responsible for?

You guys want the Church to be guilty so badly that the truth of what happens doesnt matter.

Link to comment

cdowis:

Read the posts. That has been discussed in detail. The "church" was not responsible for their deaths, the local leaders who were Mormon bear sole responsibility.

What would Jesus do? He would tell the truth -- the church was not responsible for their deaths. Individuals, acting against counsel and *specific instructions* of the church, were responsible

solo:

great response.

I did not expect praise from you, but thanks.

Don't be surprised if missionary conversion rates go down next to nothing.

Are you wishing or prophesying. In either case, conversion rates will indeed dwindle as the Last Days come upon us, as the scriptures tell us.

BTW, do you really think this film will have such a profound influence on our missionary work?

The arrogant behavior will be approportionate to the results you will get.

You guys do a great job. Keep at it.

We are arrogant in proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ, we are arrogant indeed as we boldly give our testimony, we are arrogant in rejecting the temptations and sins of this world -- drugs, alcohol, sexual permissiveness.

I hope that we can indeed "keep at it".

Link to comment

What is arrogant about not apologizing for something you arent responsible for?

You guys want the Church to be guilty so badly that the truth of what happens doesnt matter.

You are wrong! I don't want Church appear to be guilty, I have no interest in seeing Church look bad.

Frankly some of you guys are doing great job on that.

Dude, let me tell you this again;

The people who perpetuated this crime were members of the Church, they were leaders in their Community. Isn't it fair that to see there's at least retribution From Salt Lake regarding this crime?

When your sons, grandsons commit a crime are you going to shrug it off and get on with your life?

This exactly what happened last century. You ignore it, it is blown way out of proportion.

Link to comment

I don't see how today's church has ignored it. Eyring's recent statement and the Ensign article addresses it head on. The church isn't going to apologize for something they didn't do. The men responsible should apologize but they are already dead. Even if Brigham and some of the leaders in Salt Lake City could have stopped it and bear some responsibility (although evidence suggests otherwise) they are also dead and cannot apologize. You are asking the church to indict Brigham Young when he is beyond the grave and cannot defend himself. What if he is completely innocent and we smear his name unjustly. The church isn't going to do that nor are they going to apologize for something they personally were not involved in.

But they will express regret that those claiming to be God fearing Christians would turn to murder and bloodshed. This is the appropriate response.

Link to comment

You are wrong! I don't want Church appear to be guilty, I have no interest in seeing Church look bad.

Frankly some of you guys are doing great job on that.

Dude, let me tell you this again;

The people who perpetuated this crime were members of the Church, they were leaders in their Community. Isn't it fair that to see there's at least retribution From Salt Lake regarding this crime?

When your sons, grandsons commit a crime are you going to shrug it off and get on with your life?

This exactly what happened last century. You ignore it, it is blown way out of proportion.

What did you want Brigham Young to do? Go down to the settlements and string up the guilty parties himself? I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but I get the feeling you aren't- the political situation in Utah was a mess at the time of the massacre. U.S. troops were on the march to Utah without giving the Utahns notice or reason for the march, though rumors were they would despoil the Mormons and take over the reigns of government of the territory. By the time the scene calmed a little no Church leader was in position to take action against those participating in the MMM. Young and others asked the new regime to investigate, they refused.

So what was a Church leader- Brigham Young- supposed to do about justice in regards to the MMM in a case of he said she said when he had naught but ecclesiastical authority over the Church?

Link to comment

cdowis

cdowis

great response. Don't be surprised if missionary conversion rates go down next to nothing.

The arrogant behavior will be approportionate to the results you will get.

You guys do a great job. Keep at it.

Do be surpirsed that the missionary effort will continue to be strong. Do be surprised that this film will have no effect on the church. Do be surpirsed that as DCP stated that this film will go away into the nothing. It failed all by it's own merrits. Does this not speak volumes for its self? I cant understand Why anybody would stick up for such filth.

Solo have you been impervious to the entire last months responses to this film. The verdict is already out on this film or did you somehow miss the memo. The condemning wasn't even done by Mormons but by anyone who could see through the films agenda. Those involved in the film have had to resort to libeling the church to get their ev target audience to go out and see it. They are an embarrasment. Do you really want to go down with this ship?

Believe me you are only damaging your own credibility by defending this junk.

Well said, well said!

Link to comment

You are wrong! I don't want Church appear to be guilty, I have no interest in seeing Church look bad.

Frankly some of you guys are doing great job on that.

Dude, let me tell you this again;

The people who perpetuated this crime were members of the Church, they were leaders in their Community. Isn't it fair that to see there's at least retribution From Salt Lake regarding this crime?

When your sons, grandsons commit a crime are you going to shrug it off and get on with your life?

This exactly what happened last century. You ignore it, it is blown way out of proportion.

The only part you got right is "it is blown way out of proportion" Keep it up. Your doing great on the sinking ship "September Dawn".

Link to comment
You are wrong! I don't want Church appear to be guilty, I have no interest in seeing Church look bad.

Really?

Then why do you try so hard to do so?

Frankly some of you guys are doing great job on that.

How, exactly? By refusing to accept collective guilt for the actions of others, simply because they also happened to be members of the Church?

Dude, let me tell you this again;

The people who perpetuated this crime were members of the Church, they were leaders in their Community.

And the people who demanded the Crucifixion of Jesus were Jews, and were leaders in their community.

And thus, people who think exactly like you have been calling all Jews everywhere "Christ-killers" ever since.

That's what the false and evil notion of collective guilt does, you see. It feeds the hatreds of bigots.

Isn't it fair that to see there's at least retribution From Salt Lake regarding this crime?

Retribution against whom?

When your sons, grandsons commit a crime are you going to shrug it off and get on with your life?

What is your alternative? Accept personal responsibility for the actions of others? Is that what you would do?

This exactly what happened last century. You ignore it, it is blown way out of proportion.

It certainly is, and you are doing the blowing.

Oh, and just BTW: I realise you know nothing at all about Church disciplinary matters, but family members of excommunicated people routinely ask for their blessings to be posthumously restored, and the requests are usually granted after an appropriate waiting period. This would be done even for you. Do not be so quick to demand that it not be done, or to express unrighteous outrage that it was done, for someone else.

Regards,

Pahoran

Link to comment

Don't be surprised if missionary conversion rates go down next to nothing.

The arrogant behavior will be approportionate to the results you will get.

You guys do a great job. Keep at it.

What do you know about missionary conversion rates? I believe this is a non-issue outside of Utah. This will have no effect at all on conversions, because it is the Spirit of the Lord that converts not some second rate historians or has been actor of a well funded anti-Mormon propaganda film. If it is arrogant to contradict apostate anti-Mormon defamation then I shall be arrogant. I applaud Br. Peterson's comments and I endorse them 100% all this movie is about is trying to defame the Church and to libel a Prophet of God. The sensationalizing of this massacre by using the irony of the September 11th date was a stroke of genius on the part of Lucifer and his servants so as to subtly connect the religious fanatics of the 2001 terrorists attacks with the 19th century Mormons. Those who conspired to kill those immigrants were vile murderers, but they did not kill for religious reasons or because a Prophet of God told told them to, they killed out of revenge and fear, then I believe they possibly turned it into a "secret combination" to try to keep the facts hidden not only from the world but from the Church. Trying to implicate the Church and Brigham Young is the same old anti-Mormon crap, they will say anything to undermine the truth and to fight against God and His Church.
Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...