The Mountain Meadows Massacre

[pseudogratix]

IF you have "better" info and/or sources than Peterson/Smith/Brooks on this...PLEASE let us hear them!

You seem to be missing the point. I am addressing your allegation about the content of "Essentials in Church History." So, the only reference required for addressing your allegation is "Essentials in Church History."

[tapped]

the basis for that statement ("allegation") is correctly quoted from the source I named.... It is available for most all (from amazon.com, others) at a reasonable price.

BTW, while at amazon...read the reviews of Peterson's book (including mine)

[pseudogratix]

the basis for that statement ("allegation") is correctly quoted from the source I named...

Yet, we aren't talking about other sources and other allegations (you seem to be forgetting your own allegation of "one man, JDLee, could NOT have done the MMM alone as was quoted in "Essentials...." and going off on other issues). I am merely addressing whether or not "Essentials in Church History" stated that only Lee was involved. It doesn't and therefore your allegation of "one man, JDLee, could NOT have done the MMM alone as was quoted in "Essentials...." is evidently false. Game over.

[tapped]

(all) GET YOU OWN INFO!

Get a copy of Juanita Brooks Mormon Woman Historian by Levi Peterson (paperback, 1996, University of Utah Press). It's prob at many Utah libraries AND avail through amazon.com...(used $7.11 + s/h) you may also be lucky enough to find the edition of EICH I had (before divorce), from my days at Ricks.

what I said was true: a) JDL could not have done the MMM alone! that was quoted in EICH (by JFSmith) that he did! c) those statements were quoted in a later book by Levi Peterson(U of Utah Press, 1996, p. 208). CHECK IT OUT!

pseudos quote from EICH...would not be the first time another edition of a book was posted on the web. Peterson tells us the truth (or was he wrong also?)

then (if still in doubt) get in touch with Eugene Sessions and/or other reliable historians....there is virtually no question that a cover-up of the MMM was done, at least down to (at least) President D. O McKay exerting pressure on JB not to publish news of JDL's reinstatement (WHY? Peterson explains)

[USU78]

much as I am ashamed to admit it now...in college, I was 'young & impressionable'...(many young college students were)... What the church, through Ricks (mine was in the mid-60's) (and others?) taught about the MMM was FALSE:

one man, JDLee, could NOT have done the MMM alone as was quoted in "Essentials...." To say otherwise is SO preposterous it is OUTRAGEOUS!

Who, dear tapped, is saying any such thing?

Is anybody here arguing the Paiutes were the only perps?

Is anybody here arguing on JDL was involved?

Is anybody defending my wife's G-G-Grandfather (Klingensmith) for cowardly buying his freedom by ratting out JDL?

Is anybody here arguing anything other than it was an awful thing?

Nope.

The only thing people are arguing is the false light characterizations of the MMM as the "worst" massacre and that BY ordered it. Should you more carefully frame your arguments to those issues instead of going off half-cocked, you'd actually find folks here more than willing to agree on much of what you believe.

And if we part company on some issues, so be it.

But you'll never convince anybody fairminded that BY ordered it. The timeline makes it impossible.

The central tragedy is, just like the fated letter in Romeo and Juliet being waylayed by a plague quarantine, BY's letter came "Too late! Too late!" to stop MMM.

[USU78]

my statement ('assertion') that there was a cover-up is correct, that is what was being taught when I was at Ricks.

Same group that taught me in HS seminary that fraternities and sororities were secret combinations probably taught this, assuming you heard and remember correctly (40+ years can do funny things to people's memories, don't you agree?).

USU "it apparently ain't just the parochial stench in Provo" 78

[USU78]

"By reinstating Lee, the church had tacitly admitted that Juanita's accusations against Brigham Young were correct." (Peterson, p. 273)

And Peterson, a fine novelist, should be the final word on this because . . . ?

[tapped]

USU:

i have consistantly wrote that whether or not BY ordered the MMM will prob NOT be resolved for now...There is simply not enough documentation on that question.

So, that issue (for now) is a Red Herring.

(would you cover-up something that YOU were not responsible for?)

a) There was a cover-up, most every reliable historian will tell that.

The (most important?) lesson form the MMM is that If those asked to participate had said NO, the church would NOT have been involved (there prob would not have been a MMM)

c) church leaders are teaching us loyalty & Compliance-conformity. NO is NOT the lesson they want us to learn! (but it stands out in time & space)

d) the church, in the person of Joseph Fielding Smith & David O McKay, as reported to us in Juanita Brooks Mormon Woman Historian by Levi Peterson attempted to repress knowledge of certain pertinent facts/events regarding the MMM and the scapegoating, by the church, of John Doyle Lee. JDL was the only one excommunicated & executed in that tragedy.

e) That book by Peterson is available to any & all today.

[tapped]

(all) READ all the material available, GO to the site of the MMM. that will tell you.

[urroner]

Yes psuedo, you go do all the work, while tapped lays around and makes all sorts of accusations and denunciations.

[USU78]

USU:

i have consistantly wrote that whether or not BY ordered the MMM will prob NOT be resolved for now...There is simply not enough documentation on that question.

So, that issue (for now) is a Red Herring.

(would you cover-up something that YOU were not responsible for?)

a) There was a cover-up, most every reliable historian will tell that.

The (most important?) lesson form the MMM is that If those asked to participate had said NO, the church would NOT have been involved (there prob would not have been a MMM)

c) church leaders are teaching us loyalty & Compliance-conformity. NO is NOT the lesson they want us to learn! (but it stands out in time & space)

d) the church, in the person of Joseph Fielding Smith & David O McKay, as reported to us in Juanita Brooks Mormon Woman Historian by Levi Peterson attempted to repress knowledge of certain pertinent facts/events regarding the MMM and the scapegoating, by the church, of John Doyle Lee. JDL was the only one excommunicated & executed in that tragedy.

e) That book by Peterson is available to any & all today.

(would you cover-up something that YOU were not responsible for?)

**** Nixon did.

[aznative]

aznative:

If I understand you then, what OTHERS do to you...makes it o.k. to do (similar?) to them??? That's lowering our standards to that of those who initiated violence!

that's a 'funny ' thing to hear (from a Christian?) my Bible tells me (in at least 3 places) NOT to return evil for evil....

Romans 12:17

1st Peter 3:8-9

1st Thessolians 5:14-15

are those 'wrong' ...or 'inoperative' now????

Then, there's Matthew 5:

44: "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you."

46 which reads "For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?"

How's your TR? up to date? Maybe the versus I quoted are some that weren't "translated correctly", huh?

I'm not saying that what others do to you makes it o.k. to do it back to them. What I am saying is that wanting to 'payback' is a natural human response, which may have fueled the actions of some LDS in MMM.

I haven't had a TR in 10 years now, if you must know. I have enjoyed my Copenhagen snuff, until recently. This is something I have never hidden.

However, I don't understand how you can get off on blaming all of this on Brigham Young. You have yet to still provide evidence on this from what I recall in regards to some of your posts in other threads.

Have fun with your Mormon hate mongering. Glad it's working for you.

[tapped]

I've got a question:

(to others) What is/was/are the lesson(s) of the MMM? (you do agree that is occurred, don't you?)

Do you agree that IF enough LDS individuals had said NO at the time...we would not be having this discussion today? the Fancher train (most likely) would have made it through Utah; that (as far as the church) would have been the finish of it...

in the way of SUBSTANCE Directly to the issue of the MMM Itself...What do You say? good or bad? Who WAS responsible? the participants didn't just all spontaneously 'show up" at the site (out for a stroll?), did they?

[tapped]

azn:

sorry to hear about the TR/tobacco thing, I hope you conquer it!

my 'whole' point here is that...Don;'t we expect 'better' of ourselves because of our church membership/knowledge of principles?

i honestly dont know (and Haven't said) that BY 'ordered' the MMM. We dont have enough documentation to say for now...So, THAT issue is a Red Herring (read back to see what I DO say!)

God is Love!

[USU78]

tapped said: "There was a cover-up, most every reliable historian will tell that."

Who has determined "reliability?" Look at the timeline and the then current reports (and not just the Corrine paper). No coverup. Just cooperation from the Church. You are passing on obfuscations motivated by antiMormon malignity.

"The (most important?) lesson form the MMM is that If those asked to participate had said NO, the church would NOT have been involved (there prob would not have been a MMM)"

Interesting opinion based upon speculation. You misunderstand Mormons in a most fundamental way. I'm surprised you miss so much (but your time at the mercy of the CES wonks probably has something to do with that).

"church leaders are teaching us loyalty & Compliance-conformity. NO is NOT the lesson they want us to learn! (but it stands out in time & space)"

Talk about red herrings. What has this to do with the MMM? It is more the subject of serious dramatic treatment in its essential tragedy (with Lee's hybris being the centerpiece) than your speculations.

"the church, in the person of Joseph Fielding Smith & David O McKay, as reported to us in Juanita Brooks Mormon Woman Historian by Levi Peterson attempted to repress knowledge of certain pertinent facts/events regarding the MMM and the scapegoating, by the church, of John Doyle Lee. JDL was the only one excommunicated & executed in that tragedy."

It's been years since I read this, yet I remember one thing: Levi has it in for BY and mischaracterizes much of Brooks. Yet your impressions of a second-hand tendential review of an historian's treatment of secondary and, sometimes, primary sources are of more value, it seems, than the primary sources. You, sir, are a fundamentalist in your thinking, bigotted in your perceptions, and blinded in your whole-cloth acception of the steamy over the substantive.

"That book by Peterson is available to any & all today."

Yet it is, and remains "a second-hand tendential review of an historian's treatment of secondary and, sometimes, primary sources [which] are of more value [to you], it seems, than the primary sources."

[aznative]

Please don't belittle or minimyze the effects of the MMM. It was a tragedy, it's effects still haunt us today. It should NEVER have happened.

No joke. You're right, it should've never of happened. But it did. You seem like you just can't let go of it. You would, IMHO, rather have the Church put the tragedy out on front street, every day, and have it's modern-day members pay for the sins of the fathers. Corruption of blood seems to be your tone here. Look, what, did I, as a Mormon have to do with the MMM? Or what do I, as a Mormon, have to do with it today? Should I be expected to wail and nash my teeth over this and go ask the descendants of the victims for mercy and forgiveness? Should the 'Christians' who forced my descendants from Far West be forced to pay homage to me and ask for my forgiveness? No. No. Get over it.

And what can be learned from the MMM tragedy? Don't allow yourself to be consumed or tempted by hatred for others who have, or may be perceived, as those who have committed atrocities against you.

I hope someday, you can let go of this and move on. However, I don't believe there needs to be a collective outpouring of collective Mormon guilt in regards to the MMM.

Oh, and without loyalty, a man has nothing to give and nothing to receive.

[tapped]

i didn't start this thread....

BUT: I do think it's time to 'face up to' the MMM, rather than still bury it, minimyze it. Its lesson(s) are there for us to benefit from, IF we will....

the cover-up Continues, because we/some are ashamed. That is a 'good thing' (apologies to Martha Stewart)

aznative: I agree, but Loyalty to what / whom?

i propose (just as Juanita did) To The Truth.

[KevinG]

C'mon guys you aren't listening! Read what Tapped has to say. Don't bother Mr. T with details or historical facts.

There was a cover up!

In fact the entire Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is a giant cover up, a mind control exercise, complete with the secret combination of commitment patterns and church sponsored armies of cult apologists.

Wake up and escape the grips of the eeeevil conspiracy. Nothing to see here, just keep walking, don't bother with the hundreds of articles and discussions, and the access to Church archives, they are just red herrings...

(and don't forget to feed the troll on the way out)

/sarcasm off/

I wanted to see what peoples reactions were to the documentary/drama last night, and I get apologists tripping over themselves to answer someone who has nothing better to do than submit rapid fire accusations and discount any replies.

Selfish as it may seem, can we put the discussion back on track, and ignore those who won't remove the proverbial fingers from their ears?

[starting another thread for discussion of the History Channel presentation in particular]

Regarding specific questions.

Was there a cover up? Yes. there are obviously some who were involved that were not brought to justice.

Is there a Church wide cover up to deny our history? No that's absurd on the face of it alone there are more materials avialable through church sources than one person could read in a month of Sundays, and they cover many angles of the tragic massacre.

Was Brigham involved? Yes, he tried to prevent it, although there is an argument that some of his firebrand rhetoric from the pulpit could have excited the less responsible among the Saints. I suspect he would have curbed his enthusiasm if he knew it would save one innocent life.

Is there a reason to continue the controversy today? No. The descendants of the victims wanted to close the book, the Chruch has tried to acknowledge that. The only ones who want to drum up emotions about the events are people making money off of being "experts" in Church scandal or those wanting a brickbat to beat the Church with.

[John Russell]

I've got a question:

(to others) What is/was/are the lesson(s) of the MMM? (you do agree that is occurred, don't you?)

Do you agree that IF enough LDS individuals had said NO at the time...we would not be having this discussion today?  the Fancher train (most likely) would have made it through Utah; that (as far as the church) would have been the finish of it...

in the way of SUBSTANCE Directly to the issue of the MMM Itself...What do You say? good or bad? Who WAS responsible?  the participants didn't just all spontaneously 'show up" at the site (out for a stroll?), did they?

Tapped, are you familiar with other incidents involving Amerindians and emigrants through Utah at about the same time as the MMM? How do these other events mesh with your attitude toward MMM and the Church? In other words, did the MMM reflect a pervasive pattern that would indicate a general attitude of the Church and its leaders, or is it an isolated event that would suggest a tragic convergence of happenstance and emotion, rather than policy? Are you familiar with Utah history during the period of the MMM? Was such behavior a pattern?

[aznative]

Forget it John, it'd hopeless. Some people get off on feeling guilty all of the time. All i know is that it is done and over with. No cover up that I can see. Just an unfortunate aspect of our past for which the Church has tried to make ammends for, but those ammends will appearently never be good enough for some.

[John Russell]

Forget it John, it'd hopeless. Some people get off on feeling guilty all of the time. All i know is that it is done and over with. No cover up that I can see. Just an unfortunate aspect of our past for which the Church has tried to make ammends for, but those ammends will appearently never be good enough for some.

I know. I think that "Tapped" should be changed to "Trapped".

[aznative]

Yeah. I think tapped is all 'tapped' out on this MMM thing.

[urroner]

tapped snipped:

aznative: I agree, but Loyalty to what / whom?

i propose (just as Juanita did) To The Truth.

I snip back:

Is that loyalty to your version of Truth tapped?

[tapped]

JR:

(As I have said before) what OTHERS did should Not be the standard of the Saints conduct/behavior. (aren't we supposed to be 'better' than 'the world'?)

I DID NOT accuse or even suggest that BY 'ordered' the MMM; I simply DON'T KNOW the answer to that question/issue. some seem to agree that his rhetoric was a bit over the edge.

'church wide' cover up? No, it was mostly at the top, those are the people who want to steer public (including member) opinions/thoughts about the church and its leaders. I had NO PART in any cover-up. I quote reliable sources. Peterson & Brooks got it RIGHT, Smith got it WRONG. due to the tendencies we all have 9at least latently) the cover-up continued, through someone's decision Not to publicize it widely.

Some keep saying "Enough!" "Case CLOSED!" (but more books still appear, There's advance word of one 'sponsored' by the church to come out soon(?).

i say....when all have learned the lesson(s) of the MMM, that will be enough.

When the descentents of the victims have been compensated for their losses - to 'close the loop'. That will be enough. In my Book of Mormon is the statement that 'past mistakes have been perpetuated in past editions.' That's the best approach to the MMM as well!

As my PERSONAL ending..I believe that the church education system should be re-named to honor Juanita Leavitt Pulsipher Brooks 1898-1989. Long may her memory live in the hearts & minds of those who love the truth.

[ldshottie:)]

The central tragedy is, just like the fated letter in Romeo and Juliet being waylayed by a plague quarantine, BY's letter came "Too late! Too late!" to stop MMM.

The MMM makes me physically ill. It is like holocaust movies. They are disgusting, yet I can't stop looking at the screen. The MMM is one of those horrific events from the past that you wish you could go back in time to stop, but we can't. Was justice done? Probably not. What can we do about it now? Nothing really. It is so frustrating. The 1999 dedication was a nice gesture, but I think saying we need to close the book is a bit of a cop out. I hear too often members saying we need to forget about the MMM and move on. We study history to learn from it. What would be our reaction if muslims told us to forget about 9/11? It's in the past, and we need to move on. We have not closed the book on the extermination order that was issued by governor Boggs, yet the state of Missouri offically revoked the order and apologized to us back in the 70s. We study these things because it is part of the historical record, and we need to learn from it. New generations need to learn from it.

What happened at MMM? It is a mystery, an enigma. It makes no sense. Why did Brigham Young send a letter ordering the men NOT to murder the fancher party. Duh, wouldn't NOT murdering people be the default action, especially for Latter-Day Saints? It makes no sense. I don't invade my neighbor's house, prepare to kill her and her children, and then wait for the bishop to tell me NOT to do it. The actions at MMM are all backward. Why would Young find it necessary to send a letter telling them to let the wagons pass? Wouldn't he just assume that his men down there would let wagons pass by default? The whole ugly affair stinks. I don't believe Brigham Young had anything to do with it, but I just don't understand why the leaders in Southern Utah found it necessary to murder first, unless ordered not to by Young.