Was Brigham Young involved in the Mountain Meadows Massacre? Ep. 78

[@rachelrasmussen1101]

Being a human is hard. My heart breaks for the horrors of this act. "There is no fear in love. For perfect love cast out fear. Because fear hath torment. He that feareth can not be made perfect in Love". Love your neighbor, guys. Because we can all be monsters if we forget that.

[@randyjordan5521]

You assert that Brigham Young did not give the order to attack the Fancher train, and that he had no knowledge of the attack. That is completely false. Mormon historian Juanita Brooks wrote this in her 1950 book on the massacre: "Jacob Hamblin.....decided to take a group of the chiefs to Great Salt Lake City for an interview with the great Mormon chief, Brigham Young. His handwritten diary, as yet unpublished, says: 'I started for Great Salt Lake City in company with Thales Haskell and Tutsegabit...He had felt anxious for a long time to visit Brigham Young. We fell in company with George A. Smith. Conosh [the Pauvant chief] joined us. Other Indian chiefs also joined our company. When we arrived in the city there were ten of them went up to see Brigham Young, the great Mormon chief. We encamped on Corn Creek on our way up; near a company of Emigrants from Arkansas, on the-----' "Here the account stops abruptly, for the next leaf is torn out.....What Brigham Young told the chiefs in that hour was not recorded, but we might hazard an opinion that it was not out of harmony with his written instructions that 'they must learn that they have got to help us or the United States will kill us both.'.....At that time Brigham Young had to be sure of his allies, for he was conducting a war against tremendous odds. The previous Mormon policy had been to keep the natives from stealing and plundering and to teach them the peaceful pursuits of farming and cattle raising, but now Brigham Young seemed determined that he would no longer "hold them by the wrist," as he told Captain Van Vliet a few days later." "The Indians must have started back home immediately, for in seven days they were harassing the emigrants at Mountain Meadows, and in ten days they participated in the massacre of the company." (Brooks, Mountain Meadows Massacre, pp. 40-42.) Brooks wrote in a later edition of her book: "Recently I was given access to an electrostatic copy of the daily journal of Brigham Young. Under date of September 1, 1857, the entry reads: 'Kanosh the Pavaunt chief with several of his band visited me gave me some council and presents. A spirit seems to be takeing possession of the Indians to assist Israel. I can hardly restrain them from exterminating the Americans.' "This seems very significant. The 'Journal History of the Church' under this same date tells of the visit of Jacob Hamblin and twelve Indian chiefs from the south. President Young talked with them all, but it seems that Kanosh was given private audience. He was the chief who had killed Captain John W. Gunnison and several of his men as they were camped on the Sevier River on October 28, 1853. Whether or not Kanosh and his band were at the Mountain Meadows we do not know, but we can now be certain that the Mormon war strategy was to use the natives as 'the battle-ax of the Lord,' as some of the early missionaries had stated." ("Mountain Meadows Massacre," Juanita Brooks, p. xiii.) In 1998, Mormon historian David Bigler provided more detail on that war council: "Hamblin and some twelve Indian chiefs on September first met with Brigham Young and his most trusted interpreter, 49-year-old Dimick Huntington, at Great Salt Lake. Taking part in this pow-wow were Kanosh, the Mormon chief of the Pahvants; Ammon, half-brother of Walker; Tutsegabit, head chief of the Piedes; Youngwuds, another Piede chieftain, and other leaders of desert bands along the Santa Clara and Virgin Rivers. "Little was known of what they talked about until recently when it came to light that Huntington (apparently speaking for Young) told the chiefs that he 'gave them all the cattle that had gone to Cal[ifornia by] the south rout[e].' The gift 'made them open their eyes,' he said. But 'you have told us not to steal,' the Indians replied. 'So I have,' Huntington said, but now they have come to fight us & you for when they kill us they will kill you.' The chiefs knew what cattle he was giving them. They belonged to the Baker-Fancher train." ("Forgotten Kingdom: The Mormon Theocracy in the American West," David Bigler, pp. 167-168.) Since the Baker-Fancher train was the last one to head to "California by the south route" that fall, Huntington's remark could have only referred to that train with their herd of about 400 cattle. Utah historian Hubert Bancroft shed further light on Dimick Huntington's activities: "Major Carleton, of the first dragoons. In a despatch to the assistant adjutant-general at San Francisco, dated Mountain Meadows, May 25, 1859, he says: 'A Pah Ute chief of the Santa Clara band, named Jackson, who was one of the attacking party, and had a brother slain by the emigrants from their corral by the spring, says that orders came down in a letter from Brigham Young that the emigrants were to be killed; and a chief of the Pah Utes, named Touche, new living on the Virgin River, told me that a letter from Brigham Young to the same effect was brought down to the Virgin River band by a man named Huntingdon.' A copy of the major's despatch will be found in the Hand-book of Mormonism, 67-9. Cradlebaugh says that after the attack had been made, one of the Indians declared that a white man came to their camp with written orders from Brigham to 'go and help to whip the emigrants.' " ("History of Utah," p. 561.) Juanita Brooks also offered: "This policy of robbing the passing emigrant was clearly a part of the general war tactics, since, for the time being, all 'Mericats' [Americans] were considered enemies." "As president of the Southern Indian Mission, [Jacob Hamblin] was responsible for the conduct of Indian affairs; as military commander of the area, Haight had sent these men to work with the natives in carrying out the war policies. With Zion standing against the world, and with the Indians as allies, they were prepared to prey upon every passing emigrant company as part of the contribution to the war." (Juanita Brooks, "Mountain Meadows Massacre," p. 122, 131.) Seeing as how the Mormons led the Indians to attack other emigrant trains from as far south as the Las Vegas area to Idaho territory in the north, the MMM was obviously not a one-off, isolated incident, but was in fact part of the institutional church's "war tactics", of which of course Brigham Young was the head. Brigham Young's original plan was for the Indians to make the attack, with the local Mormons staying out of sight, yet supervising the event. That plan was dashed when the Fancher party vigorously defended themselves and killed a couple of the Indians, repelling the initial attack. That's why the Mormon leaders devised the plan to lure the emigrants out under a flag of truce and murder them. The Mormons knew that if they allowed the emigrants to pass on, that the emigrants would notify authorities in California that white men were supervising the Indians. Also, you speak disparagingly of "a guy named Will Bagley" in your video. In case you aren't aware, Bagley, who recently died, was a well-respected, degreed historian of Utah and the western US for many decades. You imply that he alone tried to "make the case" that Brigham Young was behind the attack. I hope you can see from the documentation I've provided here that Bagley was not the only, nor the first, historian to correctly blame Young and institutional church teachings and policies for the incident, and delete your disparaging commentary regarding him. He's not here to defend himself.

[@johnlee1352]

Bagley was a brilliant historian...too bad he slid down the awkward slope of hatred for the Mormons. Like those afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome, he couldn't set it aside and it plagued his otherwise helpful work. It clouded and damaged his reputation when speaking of the Mormons. Sad. There is absolutely no evidence that BY knew of the massacre until afterwards and there is affirmative evidence that he sent a letter to stop any violence. My great grandfather rode to SLC to inform BY of the incident about 10 days after it occurred. Stop the guess work and get real.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@johnlee1352 In my comments to which you're responding, I quoted historians Hubert Bancroft, Juanita Brooks, and David Bigler. I didn't cite Will Bagley. I only mentioned Bagley because the OP disparaged him. And now you're disparaging him too, because of your ignorance of the facts of the MMM. For instance, you wrote "There is absolutely no evidence that BY knew of the massacre until afterwards" Young of course did not learn of the details or the extent of the massacre until after it occurred (nor could he), but it is clear that he planned and approved of the attack by the Indians. This is proven by the diary entry of Young's Indian interpreter Dimick Huntington (brother of Young's plural wife Zina Huntington), which I cited above: "Little was known of what they talked about until recently when it came to light that Huntington (apparently speaking for Young) told the chiefs that he 'gave them all the cattle that had gone to Cal[ifornia by] the south rout[e].' The gift 'made them open their eyes,' he said. But 'you have told us not to steal,' the Indians replied. 'So I have,' Huntington said, but now they have come to fight us & you for when they kill us they will kill you.' The chiefs knew what cattle he was giving them. They belonged to the Baker-Fancher train." ("Forgotten Kingdom: The Mormon Theocracy in the American West," David Bigler, pp. 167-168.) When Brigham Young told those naive, trusting Indian chiefs that "when they (the members of the Fancher emigrant train) kill us they will kill you," he effectively admitted that the attack on the train would likely result in violence and death. Corroborating Young's words to the Indian chiefs is his letter to Army captain Stewart van Vliet of September 1, the very day of the initial attack: "If the government dare to force the issue, I shall not hold the Indians by the wrist any longer. If the issue comes, you may tell the government to stop all emigration across the continent, FOR THE INDIANS WILL KILL ALL WHO ATTEMPT IT." (As quoted in Brooks, p. 139.) This obviously shows that Young had the Indians under his control, and outright admitted that they would KILL---not just attack and rob---all emigrants who crossed through their territory. Since the Fancher party was the last emigrant train heading through Mormon country that year---and Young met with 12 Indian chiefs in SLC one week before the attack to plan it---then it's obvious that the Fancher train were the people whom Young had granted the Indians permission to attack.

[@johnlee1352]

@@randyjordan5521 No, it's not obvious at all. Sadly, you make all the haters' assumptions. BY orchestrated the cover-up but he didn't know of the incident until my grandfather told him about it 10 days later. Think about it...If there was any evidence (and I mean ANY evidence) to the contrary, the Feds would have gone after him with a vengeance...Young is who they wanted all along. John D. Lee was offered clemency over and over if he would implicate Brigham Young, John Taylor and Lorenzo Snow. Your zeal for the defamation and denigration of the Mormons clouds your analysis of the facts.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@johnlee1352 I've given you the clear evidence from multiple original sources and professional historians that Brigham Young planned and approved the attack during a war council with 12 southern Indian chiefs held one week before the attack. I've also given you the evidence that the MMM was not a one-off, isolated incident, but was in fact part of the Mormons' routine tactics during the period. It's not a question of being "haters." You are simply in intellectual denial of the facts. One more note re: Brigham Young's letter to Isaac Haight: You claim to be a descendant of John D. Lee. One would think that you would have read this from Lee's confession: "I did not know then that a messenger had been sent to Brigham Young for instructions. Haight had not mentioned it to me. I now think that James Haslem was sent to Brigham Young, as a sharp play on the part of the authorities to protect themselves, if trouble ever grew out of the matter." Young wrote his response to Haight merely to establish "plausible deniability." Since Young had planned and approved of the attack, all he cared about was that no Mormons could be implicated in the incident. That's why he wrote to Haight "The Indians, I expect, will do as they please." But Young could not foresee that the Fancher party would repel the Indian attack, and that the emigrants would discover that the Mormons were supervising the Indians. Also, Young's warning to Army officer Stewart van Vliet, written on September 7, wherein he warned that he "shall not hold the Indians by the wrist any longer.....tell the government to stop all emigration across the continent, for the Indians will kill all who attempt it," clearly shows that Young was in control of the Indians, and that they would kill passing emigrants if he so ordered it. So Brigham Young's words from his own mouth convict him as being ultimately responsible for the MMM. When you continue to defend Brigham Young, you need to understand that you are defending one of the worst mass murderers in US history.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@johnlee1352 "If there was any evidence (and I mean ANY evidence) to the contrary, the Feds would have gone after him with a vengeance...Young is who they wanted all along. John D. Lee was offered clemency over and over if he would implicate Brigham Young, John Taylor and Lorenzo Snow." You are ignorant of the fact that all Mormons had sworn oaths of secrecy and loyalty to not testify against each other. Young told Lee: "This is the most unfortunate affair that ever befell the Church. I am afraid of treachery among the brethren that were there. If any one tells this thing so that it will become public, it will work us great injury. I want you to understand now, that you are never to tell this again, not even to Heber C. Kimball. It must be kept a secret among ourselves. When you get home, I want you to sit down and write a long letter, and give me an account of the affair, charging it to the Indians. You sign the letter as Farmer to the Indians, and direct it to me as Indian Agent. I can then make use of such a letter to keep off all damaging and troublesome enquiries." Lee's first trial ended in a mistrial, with four non-Mormons voting to convict, and eight Mormons voting to acquit. But Lee's second trial consisted of twelve Mormon jurors, who convicted him. That indicates that something happened to change Mormons' attitudes towards Lee 180 degrees between his two trials; the obvious likely scenario was that Brigham Young orchestrated his conviction, and ordered the Mormon jury members to convict him, to end any further investigations or prosecutions of any more Mormons, including Young himself.

[@PapaKryptoss]

We in the Lee family know that Mr Bishop changed up John's confessions book. The money from that book was supposed to go to John's family but most of the money went to Mr Bishop

[@JohnDLee-im4lo]

To be fair, JDL owed Bishop for his legal fees and he was instructed to pay himself first. There's no accounting...

[@PapaKryptoss]

@@JohnDLee-im4lo But that didn't give Bishop the right to change up his book

[@JohnDLee-im4lo]

@@PapaKryptoss true...

[@johnlee1352]

@@PapaKryptoss How are you family with John D. Lee? Which wife?

[@PapaKryptoss]

@@johnlee1352 my line goes through Rachael Lee

[@doubled1598]

Everyone of those pieces of crap that committed those murders should be burning in hell!

[@darynflentje]

How do you explain Brigham Young ordering to destroy the memorial the US troops made honoring the people of Arkansas slain at Mountain Meadows? This memorial was made at the site where the massacre started. Why did Brigham Young want this memorial destroyed? ... could it be perhaps that he thought the people murdered by the Mormons deserved their fate? I would say it is highly likely Brigham Young ordered the massacre in retribution for the death of Apostle Parley P. Pratt who was killed in Arkansas the same year 1857, that the Mormons perpetrated the slaughter of 125 inocent men, women and children. The only people the Mormons spared in this mass murder were kids 7 and younger because they thought they were too young to be able to “tell stories” about the slaughter of their families which they witnessed.

[@SaintsUnscripted]

Actually not true about the apology. The Church did officially apologize. www.deseret.com/2007/9/12/20040883/lds-church-issues-apology-over-mountain-meadows#flags-wave-at-the-event-marking-the-150th-anniversary-of-the-mountain-meadows-massacre-at-the-memorial-site-near-enterprise

[@darynflentje]

@@SaintsUnscripted Thanks for pointing this out. I amended my comment.

[@randyjordan5521]

In 1859, U. S. Army Brevet Major M.H. Carleton led the first official investigation into the MMM. Upon visiting the site, his soldiers built a crude memorial to the victims out of stones, with a wooden cross atop it, inscribed with the saying "Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord." In 1861, Brigham Young visited southern Utah, including the MMM site. The following statements were recorded of Young's reaction upon viewing the memorial: "We visited the Mt. Meadows Monument put up at the burial place of 120 persons killed by Indians in 1857. The pile of stone was about twelve feet high but beginning to tumble down. A wooden cross is placed on top with the following words, Vengeance is mine and I will repay saith the Lord. Pres. Young said it should be Vengeance is mine and I have taken a little." (Wilford Woodruff's journal, May 25, 1861.) "My grandfather, Dudley Leavitt, was present, and he told the incident repeatedly, so that it has been verified by three of his sons. One preserved it in these words, quoting his father: 'I was with the group of elders that went out with President Young to visit the spot in the spring of '61. The soldiers had put up a monument, and on top of that a wooden cross with words burned into it, Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay. Brother Brigham read that to himself and studied it for a while and then he read it out loud, Vengeance is mine saith the Lord; I HAVE repaid. He didn't say another word. He didn't give an order. He just lifted his right arm to the square, and in five minutes there wasn't one stone left upon another. He didn't have to tell us what he wanted done. We understood.' " ("Mountain Meadows Massacre," Juanita Brooks, p. 183.) "Went past the monument that was erected in commemoration of the massacre that was committed at that place.....On one side of the cross is inscribed Mountain Meadow Massacre and over that in smaller letters is vengeance is mine & I will repay saith the Lord. On the other side.....some one has written below this in pencil. Remember Haun's Mill and Carthage Jail....." (Journal of Lorenzo Brown, as quoted in ibid, p. 183.) Brigham Young's attitude and remarks clearly indicate that he was not sorry that the MMM had occurred, and that the massacre was an appropriate act of "vengeance." On that same visit to southern Utah, Young spoke in a church meeting. Many Mormons in attendance had been among the murderers at Mountain Meadows four years prior, including Bishop John D. Lee, who recorded Young's comments in that church meeting: "Pres. Young said that the company that was used up at the Mountain Meadows were the Fathers, Mothers, Bros., sisters & connections of those that murdered the Prophets; they merited their fate, & the only thing that ever troubled him was the lives of the women & children, but that under the circumstances this could not be avoided." ---John D. Lee's diary entry of May 30th, 1861, as published in "A Mormon Chronicle: The Diaries of John D. Lee, 1848-1876", edited by Robert G. Cleland and Juanita Brooks. Several southern Utah Mormons had alleged that some members of the Fancher emigrant train had boasted of being among the murderers of Joseph and Hyrum Smith in 1844. Also, LDS apostle Parley P. Pratt had been murdered in Arkansas a couple of months before the Fancher train, which had originated in Arkansas, passed through southwestern Utah. Some Mormons stated that it was Pratt's murder, in Arkansas, that enraged them to massacre the party, on the spurious grounds that they had something to do with Pratt's murder. The reason Mormons would kill people whom they believed, or were told, had murdered Joseph or Hyrum Smith, or Parley P. Pratt, is that Brigham Young had implemented an "oath of vengeance" into the temple endowment ceremony, in which patrons swore to "avenge the blood of the prophets unto the third and fourth generation." Since the doctrine of "blood atonement" was promoted by the institutional LDS church, and specifically by Brigham Young----- and the "Oath of Vengeance" against the killers of Mormon leaders which Mormons swore allegiance to in the temple endowment ceremony was instituted by Brigham Young----- and participants in the MMM referred to that oath as being their "authority" to commit the massacre----- and Brigham Young spoke approvingly of the MMM as an act of justifiable "vengeance", and that the victims (except for the women and children) "merited their fate"--- then it is obvious that the man ultimately responsible for the Mountain Meadows Massacre was Brigham Young.

[@darynflentje]

@@randyjordan5521 thank you for adding this wonderful content to tell the history. This is excellent documentation.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@darynflentje You're welcome. I began studying the MMM about 25 years ago because numerous Mormon scholars and apologists asserted that Brigham Young and the institutional church had nothing to do with it. Clearly, the facts show the exact opposite.

[@giannaconti9681]

i’m not sure if you’ve already done a video on this but do you think that you could do a video on what it means to “take the lord’s name in vain?” most people believe this to just be cursing but I think it’s different and wanna know the church’s stance on this

[@seans5289]

What do you make of Brigham Young telling the Bureau of Indian Affairs that Paiutes massacred the Baker-Fancher party?

[@jonahlarsen9664]

Brigham wrote that report two months after John D. Lee reported to brigham that it was the Paiutes who killed the emigrants and that the saints hadn't had any involvement. Brigham believed the Paiutes were responsible at the time.

[@seans5289]

Jonah Larsen: If you found an old journal entry, written by an early church leader or something, indicating that Brigham had indeed been told the true events before writing the letter. Would that lower your confidence that Brigham had no part?

[@Connor-dy6wq]

@@seans5289 I know you didn't ask me, but personally, I would first make sure it was legit and not just some new things somebody came up with to besmirch the church's reputation, but if it was from the right time period, and it wasn't just somebody saying that Brigham knew, like in the autobiography, then yeah I'd believe he might have known.

[@seans5289]

@@Connor-dy6wq: He requested compensation from the BIA, officially blaming the Paiute.

[@Connor-dy6wq]

@@seans5289 I was answering your question about if something was found would that change my opinion, not your original comment. It's not an issue I care enough about to research much on, so if you have a source or something you could link to back up that statement, cause with the info I have right now it's basically just your word against the word of people who say he blamed them before knowing that the saints were involved.

[@exmodeadpool]

I wonder, how could other Mormons be ok living side by side with people who committed that crime? Why wait for federal government for 20 years to start a trial? Young had all the power needed to deal with the situation.

[@bumbblekitten]

I can understand why Brigham Young waited cause federal would be more justice than him making a choice himself. But I do not understand why federal waited 20 years to do it.

[@exmodeadpool]

@@bumbblekitten Well, the federal government didn't wait. The following is mostly my theory, based on what I read from various sources: At first, Mormons tried to blame everything on the Native Americans. Those who slaughtered the travelers tried to camouflage themselves as Natives. Then, Brigham Young and other leaders helped the criminals to hide. Maybe they weren't sure what exactly happened at the moment, I don't know. Some church leaders were hiding from the government because of Polygamy. Then the Civil War started. Eventually, the investigation continued, but in some situations the church didn't want to help, in other the government rejected the help, since they didn't trust the Mormons. My main concern with this situation is not the Massacre itself (since those were just regular people, who made a huge mistake), but how the church behaved. The effort to blame the Native Americans, hiding the criminals, stalling the investigation, punishing only one man... If Brigham Young really was a prophet, how come he couldn't prevent the situation or ask God how to solve it faster? I doubt God could have told him to do what was actually done.

[@johnlee1352]

@@bumbblekitten The Civil War intervened between the Massacre and the Trial of Lee. The delay was logistics and a Civil War.

[@randyjordan5521]

You gotta understand that Mormonism of that time was a fanatical cult whose members swore to oaths of loyalty to each other and secrecy regarding crimes they had committed. The trial in which Lee was convicted was his second trial. In his first trial, no Mormon would testify against him, so he couldn't be convicted. He was tried again because the growing calls for justice in the MMM spurred Brigham Young to sacrifice Lee in order to prevent prosecutions of other Mormons, including himself. Young colluded with the prosecutors to railroad Lee.

[@exmodeadpool]

@@randyjordan5521 Well, they are not much different nowadays. They just put smiles on their faces and act nice because they were told to follow that. When things get serious, many of them would do anything their leadership say, regardless of morality.

[@happyraccoon4791]

Remember when Brigham went to the MMM site, raised his arm to the square and said " Vengeance is mine and I Have Taken a Little"? This is a confession. Add in the two Martial Law declarations, the actions G.A. Smith, the words of the murderers like Dame, Haight, etc. And you have a chain of command. Will Bagley is "some guy"? And who are you?

[@johnlee1352]

It's Will Bagley, dullard. No confession, only acknowledgment.

[@happyraccoon4791]

@@johnlee1352 oh look, it's the little man that calls mass murder of civilians a normal military affair

[@johnlee1352]

@@happyraccoon4791 Still myopic, I see...read something before commenting. Tedious...

[@pauletteforeman2194]

Exactly!

[@randyjordan5521]

In 1859, U. S. Army Brevet Major M.H. Carleton led the first official investigation into the MMM. Upon visiting the site, his soldiers built a crude memorial to the victims out of stones, with a wooden cross atop it, inscribed with the saying "Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord." In 1861, Brigham Young visited southern Utah, including the MMM site. The following statements were recorded of Young's reaction upon viewing the memorial: "We visited the Mt. Meadows Monument put up at the burial place of 120 persons killed by Indians in 1857. The pile of stone was about twelve feet high but beginning to tumble down. A wooden cross is placed on top with the following words, Vengeance is mine and I will repay saith the Lord. Pres. Young said it should be Vengeance is mine and I have taken a little." (Wilford Woodruff's journal, May 25, 1861.) "My grandfather, Dudley Leavitt, was present, and he told the incident repeatedly, so that it has been verified by three of his sons. One preserved it in these words, quoting his father: 'I was with the group of elders that went out with President Young to visit the spot in the spring of '61. The soldiers had put up a monument, and on top of that a wooden cross with words burned into it, Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay. Brother Brigham read that to himself and studied it for a while and then he read it out loud, Vengeance is mine saith the Lord; I HAVE repaid. He didn't say another word. He didn't give an order. He just lifted his right arm to the square, and in five minutes there wasn't one stone left upon another. He didn't have to tell us what he wanted done. We understood.' " ("Mountain Meadows Massacre," Juanita Brooks, p. 183.) "Went past the monument that was erected in commemoration of the massacre that was committed at that place.....On one side of the cross is inscribed Mountain Meadow Massacre and over that in smaller letters is vengeance is mine & I will repay saith the Lord. On the other side.....some one has written below this in pencil. Remember Haun's Mill and Carthage Jail....." (Journal of Lorenzo Brown, as quoted in ibid, p. 183.) Brigham Young's attitude and remarks clearly indicate that he was not sorry that the MMM had occurred, and that the massacre was an appropriate act of "vengeance." On that same visit to southern Utah, Young spoke in a church meeting. Many Mormons in attendance had been among the murderers at Mountain Meadows four years prior, including Bishop John D. Lee, who recorded Young's comments in that church meeting: "Pres. Young said that the company that was used up at the Mountain Meadows were the Fathers, Mothers, Bros., sisters & connections of those that murdered the Prophets; they merited their fate, & the only thing that ever troubled him was the lives of the women & children, but that under the circumstances this could not be avoided." ---John D. Lee's diary entry of May 30th, 1861, as published in "A Mormon Chronicle: The Diaries of John D. Lee, 1848-1876", edited by Robert G. Cleland and Juanita Brooks. Several southern Utah Mormons had alleged that some members of the Fancher emigrant train had boasted of being among the murderers of Joseph and Hyrum Smith in 1844. Also, LDS apostle Parley P. Pratt had been murdered in Arkansas a couple of months before the Fancher train, which had originated in Arkansas, passed through southwestern Utah. Some Mormons stated that it was Pratt's murder, in Arkansas, that enraged them to massacre the party, on the spurious grounds that they had something to do with Pratt's murder. The reason Mormons would kill people whom they believed, or were told, had murdered Joseph or Hyrum Smith, or Parley P. Pratt, is that Brigham Young had implemented an "oath of vengeance" into the temple endowment ceremony, in which patrons swore to "avenge the blood of the prophets unto the third and fourth generation." Since the doctrine of "blood atonement" was promoted by the institutional LDS church, and specifically by Brigham Young----- and the "Oath of Vengeance" against the killers of Mormon leaders which Mormons swore allegiance to in the temple endowment ceremony was instituted by Brigham Young----- and participants in the MMM referred to that oath as being their "authority" to commit the massacre----- and Brigham Young spoke approvingly of the MMM as an act of justifiable "vengeance", and that the victims (except for the women and children) "merited their fate"--- then it is obvious that the man ultimately responsible for the Mountain Meadows Massacre was Brigham Young.

[@KSAalto]

It's interesting people today judge so harshly with the standards of today, the environment and technology of today. We do so with the Israelites during Moses' time, with the pharisees during Christ's time, with Brigham Young (A prophet of Jesus Christ) and with John D Lee (a scapegoat). Instead of being an ugly tourist with so much judgement on a past we didn't live through, it would be best to be a true Christian (Advocate). Judge not or be judged with the same judgement. Judge righteously. Live the doctrine taught in the scriptures. Have Faith, Hope, Charity.

[@TheHypnotstCollector]

So, here I go, again:: From my notes... comments in no particular order in relation to the video comments. G A Smith left SLC just prior to the Fancher Baker train. This was on purpose and Mormon diaries reflect his "Vitriol" as one on JD Lee's wives wrote of his speech in Harmony. There were 2 Martial Law declarations issued. one on Aug 8 and the other on Sept 14. Copies exist and the two are laid out very differently. Mormons state "They had no pass" and this reflects the martial law issue without purposely acknowledging its existence. GA Smith never said a word to the train when he intentionally left Beaver at night and then camped next to the train. Elias and Jesse Smith never said a word to the train. It camped at Silas Smiths place at Paragonah He, unlike other Mormons, was not excommunicated nor beaten for trading with the train. All the allegations against the train come long after the mass murder. "Missouri Wildcats" is nonsense. an invention. Over 30 Mormons traveled with the train, including the above mentioned and none spoke ill of the train. John Hawley traveled for days, as did Eli Kelsey , they speak well of them. One would think someone would warn the train....Kelsey did make a reference. Hawley made a reference but nothing rises close to a real complaint against this train of 75% women and kids. Once the deed was done it was possible that JD Lee, as probate judge could have judged his own crime!! ALL crimes in Utah were funneled thru the Mormon controlled probate courts where the outcome desired could be obtained. Only Federal issues were allowed to go into the territorial court. It was RN Baskin that finally put a stop that insult in Higbe Vs Ferris and criminal and civil trails were no longer Mormon controlled. This fact made it hard to prosecute JD Lee. Not only did the Mormons control the legal jurisdiction for some 200,000+ sq miles, they also had the only printing press! And thus controlled the information flow. Once the massacre was complete, the slanders against the dead began. Kanosh even lied and said his tribe attacked the train and did the deed!! No Corn Creek Indians were art MMM! Yet Kanosh told Kane and others this lie. When the Dukes train reached Corn Creek a few days after the F/B train they heard Nothing of poison.....This shows the story of arsenic was conjured up after the Dukes party.. Well, that's some of what I typed. "I'll be back" in a bit to flesh this all out. The Utah War was not a war in any sense. There were no shots fired and no one was wounded. Not even Col Kane..... The wagon train was 350 miles from SLC on Sept 11 and the Army was some 600+ miles from SLC! itt was 5 days, some 100 miles from Ft Laramie! It had to camp at Ft Bridger, some 500 miles, ALL Winter. On Sept 11 the train was East of the Green River! The Train of women and children and the Train of the US Military were Months apart and many Hundreds of miles apart. Is it reasonable to accuse the train of being a threat to Mormons when the Mormons themselves said they would Fight the Army and even burn their own homes??

[@JohnDLee-im4lo]

Most historians count the dead at MMM as the only casualties of the Utah War. Shots fired. Lots of wounds.That's a war.

[@happyraccoon4791]

@@JohnDLee-im4lo in your fetid brain murdering 120 unarmed mostly women and children, is a normal event in war. Only in Mormonism

[@happierabroad]

dude, that letter by brigham young doesn't prove that he was innocent. he could have written that letter any time after it happened as a cover to make himself look innocent. words on paper don't prove anything. anyone can write a letter like that. we have no idea when it was written or if it was written as a cover up to feign innocence. you can't jump to conclusions like that.

[@randyjordan5521]

The attack on the emigrant train was planned and approved in a war council with Brigham Young, Daniel H. Wells, and twelve southern Indian chiefs in Salt Lake City on September 1, 1857. The plan was for only the Indians to make the attack. The emigrants repelled that attack and killed several Indians. That forced the Mormons, who were directing the Indians, to come out of hiding and lure the emigrants out under a flag of truce. So Young's letter to Haight reflected what had been ordered in that war council: Young intended for ONLY the Indians to make the attack. That's why he told Haight to not meddle with the train, but added "The Indians, I expect, will do as they please." But Young could not foresee that the emigrants would repel the Indian attack, which forced the Mormons to come in and massacre them so that none of them could make it to California and report that Mormons were in on the crime.

[@happierabroad]

I don't understand something. Who gave the order for the massacre? that's the key question. Why did they execute John Lee only if he didn't give the order for it? that isn't logical. Why didn't the court and government try to find out who ordered it? Isn't that the key question? Another thing I don't get. After the first attack on the wagon train, why didn't the settlers leave right away and head for California? They could have hitched their wagons at night and left under cover of darkness. It's better than stay and get killed right?

[@randyjordan5521]

The attack on the emigrant train was planned and approved in a war council with Brigham Young, Daniel H. Wells, and twelve southern Indian chiefs in Salt Lake City on September 1, 1857. The plan was for only the Indians to make the attack. The emigrants repelled that attack and killed several Indians. That forced the Mormons, who were directing the Indians, to come out of hiding and lure the emigrants out under a flag of truce. After the emigrants repelled the initial attack, they had to circle their wagons to protect themselves. They couldn't just up and leave, because the Indians would have followed them and picked them off as they traveled. Brigham Young chose to make Lee the scapegoat. He made a deal with prosecutors to sacrifice Lee in exchange for dropping investigations into all of the other guilty parties, including Young.

[@dianepanfil7297]

Really? The Mormons were two to one… also the wagon train couldn’t even get a few yards for water without being shot. It was a constant bombardment. The Mormons were surprised they put up such a fight because everyone else ( other massacres for profit) had been easy pickings compared to The Baker Fancher wagon train. But these were wholesome, woodsmen who knew how to shoot and fight. They held them off for 4-5 days, hence the lie to march out with only the clothes on their backs to safety. They were out of water and ammo. To try to leave would have been instant slaughter. Some men from wagon train escaped to go for help and they were run down and murdered.

[@talbertofdz]

Tell us about Haun´s Mill Massacre, How were all the details??

[@alanc1491]

There is no comparison. Haun's (Hawn's) Mill involved a mob murdering 17 Mormons, most of whom had engaged in armed hostilities with them days before. The slaughter at Mountain Meadows saw 120 innocent wagon train pioneers, first lied to and then brutally killed by the Nauvoo Legion, led by a stake president. Let that sink in, a stake president led the slaughter.

[@talbertofdz]

@@alanc1491 your point of view is unfair and biased since you cannot say that a fact or a group of people from Arkansas are worth more than tens of thousands of Latter-day Saints fervent followers of God, who were persecuted, wounded, robbed and murdered by a period of more than 35 years since 1830. members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints strive with all their hearts to please God and obey his commandments. while its attackers are mostly drunkards, drug addicts, adulterers and murderers ... Do not be a liar or serve as a stumbling block for many who sincerely seek to be the best in all aspects.

[@soxpeewee]

@@talbertofdz Wow! You literally are calling anyone who thinks the LDS church has issues a drunken liar, a drug addict, or an adulterous murderer? You're so brainwashed you're bubbling out the ears. He's correct though. He's not saying some LDS members faced persecution. He said a stake president murdered over 120 men, women and children. Doesn't sound very Christ like.

[@toddr4532]

Not quite the commentary by Mark Twain/Samuel Clemens. His book from 1871 "Roughing It" (Appendix B) gives a much different account taken from Mrs. C. V. Waite's "The Mormon Prophet". At this time, 150+ years later, with many different sources and much bias in account from all sides contending for control of the silver in the Nevada territory, we can never know what truly occurred.

[@TheHypnotstCollector]

My Entire Comment, hundreds of words is Gone! I didn't delete it....I will try again later.

[@Kman.]

Ditto. Too tired to rewrite what I had written, but before the weekend is over, I may give it another shot. Perhaps, because my comment called into question a few other things, they deleted it? I dunno, because this channel's owner/moderator has been very gracious thus far, especially in light of the fact that I oppose the Mormon's doctrine.

[@TheHypnotstCollector]

@@Kman. I don't know either. I doubt he deleted but I know I didn't....I will retype later today.

[@davidsnell2605]

I'm not sure what happened. Some keywords will automatically delete your comment (curse words, for example). I think if your comment includes links it'll also be deleted (so people don't spam the comments with inappropriate stuff). Sorry for the hassle, though.

[@Kman.]

@@davidsnell2605 Thx for the reply! I can't recall just what I may have noted, but not a problem. I do appreciate your graciousness, and say...if you haven't seen the recent video with Aaron Shafovaloff (who I'm sure you're familiar with) and the dialogue he had with a Mormon female, it's worth the view. It's dated June 12th.

[@TheHypnotstCollector]

@@davidsnell2605 That's OK. . I'm going to retype soon, it took me about 15 minutes! I took some notes to help in retype.

[@happierabroad]

The background situation you gotta consider: You gotta understand that the Mormons were not violent at first. They only got that way later. Remember that when they were in Missouri, there was an incident at Haun's Mill where a mob came and shot at the Mormons and killed 17 of them. The men who did it were never arrested. Because the governor wanted to wipe them out. So they still wanted revenge for that. I heard the incident that sparked the Meadows Massacre was when one of their missionaries was killed in Arkansas. Since that wagon train was from Arkansas, they wanted to revenge and believed that those who murdered their missionary were related to the wagon train. The local folks in Utah at the time, believed that's what triggered the massacre. It could also be that Brigham Young believed that he received a divine command from God to massacre the wagon train because he believed some of those who murdered Joseph Smith were on it. Historian Will Bagley wrote a book about it and implicated Brigham Young through some of his cryptic words. For example, when a memorial was created for the massacre victims, Brigham Young said in a consecration over it: "Vengeance is mine saith the Lord. And I have taken a little." This indicated revenge. Also, the Mormons were paranoid at the time because they believed that President Bucanan was about to send the US Army out to wipe them out. So they were on edge too. So you gotta take all that into consideration. It could also be that Brigham Young received some supernatural visitation or revelation from higher forces that told him that those who killed Joseph Smith were on the wagon train, and that God gave him the green light to go ahead and kill them in revenge. Or at least he believed he did. Who knows. Since Young and Joseph Smith did receive periodic divine revelations, then that is a possibility I think. If so, that may be why he gave the order to kill them all when the wagon train was near Salt Lake City, according to historian Will Bagley. You also gotta remember that in the 1800s Americans were wild and trigger happy, not like the pacifist wusses they are today. They didn't have cell phones and computers and TV to keep them distracted and occupied. So they were wild and trigger happy. Also killing people back then wasn't the taboo that it is now. It was bad of course, but it was a common thing people did. Especially in the wild west where people were wild and trigger happy. Btw, why was Joseph Smith arrested for declaring martial law? As mayor wasn't that in his right? And did those who arrest him plan to have him killed by a mob? Was it all planned or a spontaneous event? Obviously they had a bias against him, and were looking for some excuse to arrest him. People are very subjective and if they don't like you, they find an excuse to get rid of you, but the excuse isn't the real reason, just the trigger they need to do what they want. So why did they dislike him so much that they had to kill him? That must be an extreme dislike, not just an aversion.

[@wrm3016]

Interesting synopsis. Also interesting that you believe Mormons were not violent at first, when according to some accounts, guns were smuggled to Joseph Smith whilst in jail, and went out 'guns a blazing', so to speak'. Sounds pretty violent. Also, is it not so plausible, since mail literally took days/weeks to arrive, for Brigham Young to verbally give the 'order', then wait a certain amount of time, then send the 'letter', so as to exonerate himself? Guess we'll never know.

[@Jimothy-723]

mountain medows, battle creek, circleville, the provo masacre, the black hawk masscre, the william mcbride masacre, the porter rockwell massacre, the walker war, the utah war, the mormon war in ilinois, the morisite war.... you are an outright liar.

[@randyjordan5521]

"Remember that when they were in Missouri, there was an incident at Haun's Mill where a mob came and shot at the Mormons and killed 17 of them." The Haun's Mill massacre was committed by an unauthorized Missouri militia group who were retaliating for the Mormon "Danites" attacking and pillaging the non-Mormon towns of Millport, Gallatin, and Grinder's Fork. The entire "Missouri War" was started by the Mormons in an effort to drive out all non-Mormons from the area so that they could take over the rich agricultural lands. The Mormons who died at Haun's Mill were victims of their church leaders' criminal ideology.

[@randyjordan5521]

"Because the governor wanted to wipe them out." That's not true. The Missouri governor was forced to issue an order for the Mormons to be evicted from the state because Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon had raised an 800-man paramilitary force called the "Danites" whose mission was to drive out all non-Mormons from western Missouri and take the land for themselves. Those "Danites" had sworn to obey Smith's orders, even illegal ones. State lawmen couldn't distinguish which Mormons were members of the Danites and which were non-violent, so the governor ordered the Mormons evicted from the state en masse. No Mormons lost their lives because of the governor's order.

[@randyjordan5521]

"I heard the incident that sparked the Meadows Massacre was when one of their missionaries was killed in Arkansas. Since that wagon train was from Arkansas, they wanted to revenge and believed that those who murdered their missionary were related to the wagon train." The missionary was one of the 12 apostles of the church, Parley P. Pratt. Brigham Young certainly used his murder as an excuse to attack non-Mormons traveling through their territory. In actual fact, the Fancher people had nothing to do with Pratt's death. He was killed by the estranged husband of a woman whom he had "plural married." In other words, he was fooling around with another man's wife.

[@abrahamschuman1692]

Thanks for these two videos

[@jackblackpowderprepper4940]

Excellent story and commentary. Thanks.

[@SaintsUnscripted]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@roberthale2268]

Either he did or he didn't. I'm sure God knows and knows how to handle the situation.

[@matthewhunter6421]

I had no idea Uncle Rico was involved

[@stevenshook3348]

The saddest thing involving this massacre is that only a single Mormon, John D. Lee, was *honest* in stating the facts as they applied to the massacre.

[@Glen.Danielsen]

Not true. Learn the history. And the saddest thing about the MMM is that it happened.

[@juner0s3s22]

Great job on this one! Prophets are just men like us. There are many mistakes done by Brigham Young, he was not perfect. I appreciate you pointing out all the facts beforehand and how it could've been handled better by the prophet.

[@seans5289]

Couldn’t the prophet ask god for help in navigating something like this?

[@MM-os9hv]

Yes prophet are humans, but cover up a genocide?something like that even a regular human being could realize it's wrong!! So many things went wrong at the beginning of the mormon church! First the Lincoln rd. And cannibalism, massacre in meadows mountain. Not possible this prophets are inspired by God. Open your eyes!

[@pauletteforeman2194]

You act like the “blunder” of the horrendous crime of MMM (the WORST in American history) is about as bad as Brigham Young stubbing his big toe. I’m appalled. Eww!

[@scottvance74]

Excellent coverage of a complex and difficult topic. The next step to understanding would be an in-depth look at the mormon reformation of 1856-1857, Jedediah Grant, the early mormon catechism, requirements for re-baptism, and the Utah war. Comparing this fundamentalist wave within mormonism to the one that would occur around 1883-1885 under John Taylor could also be interesting. Perhaps a 3rd period of fundamentalism occurred between 1830-1836, though it's harder to make a case for this 3rd one because everything was in so much flux during the founding of the movement.

[@happyraccoon4791]

You won't get that info here. Try Fanny Stenhouse, "Tell it All" and The Unsolicited Chronicler.

[@nickblack7910]

@@happyraccoon4791 no

[@pauletteforeman2194]

5:09 is dismissive and distasteful. You’ll ding Brigham Young for that? WTH? This is so ridiculous. Apparently It isn’t a big deal what happened to the victims of this horrendous crime, but BY gets “dinged” (5 points) for trying to cover it up. Mormons have no humanity seriously. It’s like they can’t even comprehend what it means to have remorse for a cold blooded mass murder, let alone the worst occurrence in American history, not to mention the entire world. I’m so disgusted!

[@MarcTelesha]

Being pro-slavery and a virtual dictator might be even equal to this.

[@enclave315]

So by that logic do Jews have no humanity for what's going on in Gaza and do Muslims have no humanity for 9/11?

[@alatterdaysaintonfire5643]

I investigated this also, and I have came to the same conclusions you have. Thank you for doing these video's.

[@Jimothy-723]

okay, now you have to justify the battle creek masacre,the circleville massacre, the provo masacre, the black hawk masscre, the william mcbride masacre, the porter rockwell massacre, the walker war, the utah war, and the morisite war....

[@BrendonKing]

Was this an awful event? Yes. Was the church attempt to spin or hide the true involvement of their people, regardless of command, a bit sketch? Yes. Both things can be simultaneously true.

[@briancrismonpetersen7885]

I have been to the memorial that the Church established there to take about the only accountability possible. I have served a mission in Arkansas and was asked about this event many times. It’s hard to know for sure all that occurred and all of the factors leading up to this atrocity. There is no justification for this horrible event. I have read multiple accounts from multiple perspectives. I have been to Southern Utah with my father and spoken to Old West historians and old locals and one story is that there was a flour mill in Parowan where a man worked who helped another man in the Baker-Fancher train, part of the party that was murdered, just before they made their way to camp at Meadow Mountain. This man was an immigrant to the valley and settled there after bringing his family from Missouri. The man who worked at the mill recognized this particular member of the party passing through as the same who had raped his own wife while residents of Missouri and part of the extermination order by Governor Boggs. He swore to himself he would take revenge if he ever crossed paths with him again. His family has posterity still there. This is not a justification but it is a known fact that he, and others, charged up locals there and engaged indigenous people, believing some in the party were dangerous and justifying a preemptive attack. Unsure of where they planned to settle or what they would do next. There were some compelled to follow Lee. There were others who did not. Those that murdered these did so with the justice of God to answer to. I do not believe they were directed by Brigham Young. If this was their modus operandi they would have reacted much differently to Johnson’s Army when they came through. As only one example. There would have been multiple incidents like these from Illinois to Missouri and on and on. This was a tragic, isolated incident from those who acted out of vengeance and fear. It’s not a reflection of the Church in general anymore than the Hans Mill Massacre is a reflection of the citizens of Missouri in general.

[@tpbarron]

Good job on this Saint Unscripted

[@Doc-Pleroma-naut]

And I am not even mentioning the climate involving the Danites (who JS looked the other way like a President would overlook water-boarding)who’s job was to defend the community against dissident and excommunicated LDS. These were clear Mormon vigilantes who set a climate of Mormon strong arming of perceived outside threats. People, please realize BY actually visited the MMM and shouted, “Vengeance is mine - and I have repaid," ....a casual reminder for the Saints of their blood oath . And hey - while we are at it, let’s tear down the monument stone by stone. (Historical citation if needed) It is certainly inconclusive re: BY involvement, one way or the other. However, the religious fervor and perceived paranoia of religious persecution lend credence. That’s not the real question though. For the LDS, he was a living Prophet. Why didn't he see all of this coming and stop the Church from having the worst event in it's history from happening? Not to mention saving 130 lives in the process?

[@chaseallen7499]

If your going to make claims like what you did in your second paragraph you need to put citations. As for the other question Brigham Young was human too. Imagine help running a city and running a church has members outside of that city remember this was before the telegram so the best mode of communication was by horse. You would be pretty busy running all that. Just because he was a prophet doesn't mean he can see the future all the time.

[@chaseallen7499]

david janbaz I never said I blamed God. I said that Brigham Young could obviously be busy running a territory.

[@armenespera4542]

Not even Israel the cradle of prophets has been able to prevent the destructions that befall on her.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@chaseallen7499 Here are the citations you're asking for: In 1859, U. S. Army Brevet Major M.H. Carleton led the first official investigation into the MMM. Upon visiting the site, his soldiers built a crude memorial to the victims out of stones, with a wooden cross atop it, inscribed with the saying "Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord." In 1861, Brigham Young visited southern Utah, including the MMM site. The following statements were recorded of Young's reaction upon viewing the memorial: "We visited the Mt. Meadows Monument put up at the burial place of 120 persons killed by Indians in 1857. The pile of stone was about twelve feet high but beginning to tumble down. A wooden cross is placed on top with the following words, Vengeance is mine and I will repay saith the Lord. Pres. Young said it should be Vengeance is mine and I have taken a little." (Wilford Woodruff's journal, May 25, 1861.) "My grandfather, Dudley Leavitt, was present, and he told the incident repeatedly, so that it has been verified by three of his sons. One preserved it in these words, quoting his father: 'I was with the group of elders that went out with President Young to visit the spot in the spring of '61. The soldiers had put up a monument, and on top of that a wooden cross with words burned into it, Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay. Brother Brigham read that to himself and studied it for a while and then he read it out loud, Vengeance is mine saith the Lord; I HAVE repaid. He didn't say another word. He didn't give an order. He just lifted his right arm to the square, and in five minutes there wasn't one stone left upon another. He didn't have to tell us what he wanted done. We understood.' " ("Mountain Meadows Massacre," Juanita Brooks, p. 183.) "Went past the monument that was erected in commemoration of the massacre that was committed at that place.....On one side of the cross is inscribed Mountain Meadow Massacre and over that in smaller letters is vengeance is mine & I will repay saith the Lord. On the other side.....some one has written below this in pencil. Remember Haun's Mill and Carthage Jail....." (Journal of Lorenzo Brown, as quoted in ibid, p. 183.) Brigham Young's attitude and remarks clearly indicate that he was not sorry that the MMM had occurred, and that the massacre was an appropriate act of "vengeance." On that same visit to southern Utah, Young spoke in a church meeting. Many Mormons in attendance had been among the murderers at Mountain Meadows four years prior, including Bishop John D. Lee, who recorded Young's comments in that church meeting: "Pres. Young said that the company that was used up at the Mountain Meadows were the Fathers, Mothers, Bros., sisters & connections of those that murdered the Prophets; they merited their fate, & the only thing that ever troubled him was the lives of the women & children, but that under the circumstances this could not be avoided." ---John D. Lee's diary entry of May 30th, 1861, as published in "A Mormon Chronicle: The Diaries of John D. Lee, 1848-1876", edited by Robert G. Cleland and Juanita Brooks. Several southern Utah Mormons had alleged that some members of the Fancher emigrant train had boasted of being among the murderers of Joseph and Hyrum Smith in 1844. Also, LDS apostle Parley P. Pratt had been murdered in Arkansas a couple of months before the Fancher train, which had originated in Arkansas, passed through southwestern Utah. Some Mormons stated that it was Pratt's murder, in Arkansas, that enraged them to massacre the party, on the spurious grounds that they had something to do with Pratt's murder. The reason Mormons would kill people whom they believed, or were told, had murdered Joseph or Hyrum Smith, or Parley P. Pratt, is that Brigham Young had implemented an "oath of vengeance" into the temple endowment ceremony, in which patrons swore to "avenge the blood of the prophets unto the third and fourth generation." Since the doctrine of "blood atonement" was promoted by the institutional LDS church, and specifically by Brigham Young----- and the "Oath of Vengeance" against the killers of Mormon leaders which Mormons swore allegiance to in the temple endowment ceremony was instituted by Brigham Young----- and participants in the MMM referred to that oath as being their "authority" to commit the massacre----- and Brigham Young spoke approvingly of the MMM as an act of justifiable "vengeance", and that the victims (except for the women and children) "merited their fate"--- then it is obvious that the man ultimately responsible for the Mountain Meadows Massacre was Brigham Young.

[@johnlee1352]

Your lack of in depth knowledge of this incident is appalling. It was a military operation of the Iron County Militia that worked perfectly as a military matter but resulted in innocent deaths. The Utah War (1857-58) was in full swing...the Congress of the United States dispatched fully 1/3 of the US military to Utah to kill the Mormons since they had rejected imposition of federal authority in the State of Deseret. The Mormons had set up their own government, were printing money and were independent of the US government. When the Mormons left Illinois for the Great Basin, they had left the US and came to unincorporated Mexican territory where they prospered until the end of the Mexican War when the Utah territory and all of the western land were ceded top the US as part of the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The Mormons had had enough of the "constitutional" treatment they had received the hand of the good "Christians" in the US. There's a lot more to it and at the risk of pearls before swine, I have attempted to straighten the haters' uninformed and unfair narrative. When the Baker wagon train came to SLC, they had come too late in the year to cross the Sierra Nevada and so they went the southern route to San Bernardino. The Mormons were in a state of Martial Law and wouldn't trade any supplies with the immigrants, making for a contentious trip through the Mormon settlements. They had threatened to go into California and bring US troops up the southern flank of the Mormons. That was their doom. The Mormons couldn't afford to open a two-front war and the wagon train was the unfortunate victims of war. Brigham Young knew nothing of the massacre until my great grandfather reported it to him 10 days later. Then, the cover-up began. The Mormons couldn't afford to have this PR nightmare laid at their feet and they decided to distance themselves from the actors of this tragedy. If the Mormon church is guilty of anything, it is in the way my ancestor was treated. He was the only one tried and executed by the US government. The MMM was a military operation in a short war that ended with nobody else killed. Stop your pollution of this story.

[@williamg780]

David is literally quoting scholar after scholar who have spent much time and resources studying the subject. You’re just saying “muh ancestor” as if that gives you some special credibility.

[@JohnDLee-im4lo]

@@williamg780 Go ahead...refute anything I said. You're citing "muh scholars"...let's see what you got.

[@soxpeewee]

If Brigham Young was sent a letter asking if it was cool to attack the wagon train, how did he not find anything out about it until 10 days later? How is the treatment of your ancestor the only thing that the Church is guilty of? The Mormon military committed the massacre. That's like saying that the pope didn't okay child molestation so the Catholic priest pedophiles don't count.

[@johnlee1352]

@@soxpeewee Brigham Young was asked what to do and he told them to let them pass in peace. They sent a letter with a rider named Haslam to seek BY's advice. The responsive letter is out there for all to see. The haters will not want to read it because it makes it clear that his instructions were to let them pass. The letter contradicts their vile narrative and they don't like that. BY's response came too late...the deed was done. He was informed of that fact 10 days later by my grandfather who rode to SLC to meet with BY. Your post makes it clear that you are not interested in the truth...only the haters' narrative. So be it. Keep on hatin'!

[@dianepanfil7297]

Why are you lying? Is this your mission in life? You hit every website. Are you proud to be Lees ancestor? Well, your people killed my people and Brigham Young orchestrated it. People need to go forward by telling the truth. The truth shall set us all free!@@johnlee1352

[@mistersmith8962]

Young was an evildoer.... at times. And have a great day

[@doubled1598]

Brigham Young knew about it!

[@yoursolemnstridermusic1992]

The fact that BYU is named after the man who ordered these murders and tried to cover it up is very disturbing and sad.

[@timryan8174]

Sounds like you should probably do your research before spouting falsehoods. Did you not see the letter he wrote telling them not to do it???

[@violettasauveterre5100]

BYU is named after Brigham Young, not John D. Lee.

[@jesseoliver5630]

BYU is named after the second prophet of this dispensation. The guy who stopped a genocide

[@LdsTiktokPreservation]

Someone else who doesn’t do the fact checking on their assumptions. Sigh

[@timryan8174]

@@LdsTiktokPreservation Wrong. Sounds like you are selective about which materials you decide to believe.

[@Glen.Danielsen]

“I will ding him [Brigham Young] for downplaying the [Mountain Meadows Massacre] after the fact.” Hold on there, Dave Snell. I think there is a greater complexity of circumstances that explain the actions of BY. Please be most careful, brother. We need a fair stare-circumspect reflect! I appreciate the depth of Richard Turley’s work. Like scholar-deity Richard Bushman, he’s been a great document hound. But I don’t esteem his viewpoint, simply because he’s chosen a Liberal academic’s tack. He has made _’dear’_ friends with acidic critics and Liberals by mimicking their disposition. Cheers, brother. :)

[@skylark1250]

Robert Turley’s book is a whitewash of the event. He is a practicing Mormon.

[@Glen.Danielsen]

@@skylark1250 Then you haven’t read the book. It is not apologetics.

[@skylark1250]

@@Glen.Danielsen Turkey absolves Brigham Young. So it’s a whitewash.

[@Glen.Danielsen]

@@skylark1250 Sky of sly, suggest learn rather than churn. Tabloid talk is usually irresponsible. Person of intestinal blockage with unfortunate accumulation! In working with history, evidence is better than suspicion. There’s not a single tentacle of tangible indicator that points to Brigham Young as complicit with the illicit-no plan, no conspiracy, no foreknowledge of terrible events. He knew quite clearly of the gathering storm that had brewed over two decades, but the only communication he received about the imminent tragedy at Mountain Meadows came belated, and his reply pleading for cool heads was thus too late. Read Turley’s book.

[@Glen.Danielsen]

@@skylark1250 “He’s a practicing Mormon.” And your point is? My gosh person of dark snark, spigot of bigotry, slinger of slurry! Maybe bear in mind that to spit sh_t irresponsibly doesn’t make you a journalist. As part of my university degree in Religious Studies at a secular school, I studied the Mountain Meadows Massacres. Brigham Young had zero foreknowledge. And regarding after the fact: there is a wide difference between _concealment_ and an unwillingness to advertise.

[@sketchygetchey8299]

Conspiracy theorists before 2001: 9/11 was an inside job! Conspiracy theorists after 2001: 9/11 was an inside job! Great vid guys!