A Different MMM Thread

[_The Nehor]

LOL! I never thought of it that way...

I'm trying to get my pics from Miami...beaches and bikinis...

I have one with me holding a friend of mine, she looks scared, I look insane (as usual). I'm a goofball).

Share!!!!!!!!! :)

[_beastie]

MMM was a reaction to a perceived threat in the same way that 9/11 was a reaction to a perceived threat.

Both groups have/had suffered persecutions and injustices in the past. Both groups felt God was on their side. Both groups felt powerless in the face of a greater enemy and wanted to send a message to that greater enemy - if you mess with us we will kill your women and children. And we will kill them indiscriminately, and without regard to whether or not they "deserve" death. It's a tactic we call terrorism today.

Sometimes you just have to draw a line.

[_The Nehor]

MMM was a reaction to a perceived threat in the same way that 9/11 was a reaction to a perceived threat.

Both groups have/had suffered persecutions and injustices in the past. Both groups felt God was on their side. Both groups felt powerless in the face of a greater enemy and wanted to send a message to that greater enemy - if you mess with us we will kill your women and children. And we will kill them indiscriminately, and without regard to whether or not they "deserve" death. It's a tactic we call terrorism today.

Sometimes you just have to draw a line.

To be fair for the LDS it was an isolated incident that was never repeated or applauded. The Terrorist groups of today have made it their stated goal to continue a campaign of terror until some obscure victory is achieved and rejoice at each new slaughter.

[_Dr. Shades]

It seems that many people are forgetting (or don't know) the true context under which the MMM was carried out.

First off, the Nehor: No LDS women were raped during either the Kirtland, Independence, Far West, or Nauvoo stages of Mormonism. "Mormon women were raped" is simply an urban legend that cropped up sometime during the early 20th Century after all the eyewitnesses were dead and gone. Quite simply, it never happened.

Second, the actual trigger-pullers of the MMM did so out of fear for their own lives, pure and simple. No, not out of fear of the Fancher party and the unarmed men, women, and children in it, but out of fear of the LDS heirarchy and "Brigham's Boys." Read any of the accounts from those days and it's ABUNDANTLY clear that disobeying the priesthood, on any level, was an automatic death sentence. To reject orders was to sign one's own death warrant, as it was only a matter of time before the Danites caught up with you back then.

One specific account of the MMM recalled a young man who tried to ride away from the scene before the carnage was carried out, but his father shot at him for doing so (and took off the tip of his ear, but that's probably an exaggeration, of course). According to the account, this was because the father knew that his son would himself be killed if he didn't stay and participate in the massacre.

So the perpetrators of the MMM did so to save their own lives.

[_Seven]

Here is an interview with Jon Voight on "Scarborough Country" about MMM and the upcoming movie "September Dawn."

He understands the parallels between Mormon fanaticals and 9/11 very well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZxhgXc-Mk4

[_Seven]

To be fair for the LDS it was an isolated incident that was never repeated or applauded. The Terrorist groups of today have made it their stated goal to continue a campaign of terror until some obscure victory is achieved and rejoice at each new slaughter.

I would like more information on the Danites from both sides. I often see apologists poke fun and make jokes at the claims of those who believe they murdered apostates. Are they a myth or did they also commit acts of terror on those who tried to leave Utah?

[_Dr. Shades]

I would like more information on the Danites from both sides. I often see apologists poke fun and make jokes at the claims of those who believe they murdered apostates. Are they a myth or did they also commit acts of terror on those who tried to leave Utah?

Yes. Mormons weren't allowed to leave Utah without Brigham Young's permission.

Here is a portion of the autobiography of Bill Hickman, a former Danite who confessed many of his crimes.

When you're done with that, this and this are good pages to read next.

[_The Nehor]

It seems that many people are forgetting (or don't know) the true context under which the MMM was carried out.

First off, the Nehor: No LDS women were raped during either the Kirtland, Independence, Far West, or Nauvoo stages of Mormonism. "Mormon women were raped" is simply an urban legend that cropped up sometime during the early 20th Century after all the eyewitnesses were dead and gone. Quite simply, it never happened.

Odd, I was sure I read a reference to it in an 1870's journal I read, referring to a victim in hindsight. I'll have to try to dig that up again next time I'm visiting my parents.

[_The Nehor]

Second, the actual trigger-pullers of the MMM did so out of fear for their own lives, pure and simple. No, not out of fear of the Fancher party and the unarmed men, women, and children in it, but out of fear of the LDS heirarchy and "Brigham's Boys." Read any of the accounts from those days and it's ABUNDANTLY clear that disobeying the priesthood, on any level, was an automatic death sentence. To reject orders was to sign one's own death warrant, as it was only a matter of time before the Danites caught up with you back then.

I've read many journals from that time period and I haven't seen such an atmosphere of fear in any of them. There was mention of more than a few faithless as well who refused to obey authorities. The only time I read of anything approaching that was a case of disobedience in the militia during the Utah War. He was not murdered but he was punished.

[_beastie]

To be fair for the LDS it was an isolated incident that was never repeated or applauded. The Terrorist groups of today have made it their stated goal to continue a campaign of terror until some obscure victory is achieved and rejoice at each new slaughter.

This is true. I think that, whatever the origins of the "order" to attack the Fancher party, the participants and other parties did seem to realize the great cost that accompanies this sort of terrorist act. I read somewhere that many of the participants were haunted the rest of their lives by the act.

Of course I could also be more cynical and say that the MMM didn't have the intended effect, and only seemed to harden federal opposition to the church, and BY was smart enough to recognize that.

edit on additional point -

History makes it obvious that there are plenty of people who, under the right circumstances, will engage in violent acts of terrorism by killing innocent human beings in order to send some "message" to a third party. But I do not believe that it is justified to suggest that ANY of us could well be those sort of people, under the right circumstances. Of course I can imagine killing someone who is threatening my family. But can I imagine killing an innocent child in order to send a message to someone else who is threatening my family? No. There are some acts that are just not worth the price. Better to find a way to face death yourself than live with yourself as a child-killing monster the rest of your life.