Dubbs wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
James wrote:
Just Reading wrote:
James wrote:
myomyomy wrote:
Kit Kat I agree with what you say to a certain extent. Let me ask you a question. If you were to spread false information about another person, and you later find out to not be totally correct, do you have a responsibility to say you are sorry and try to correct misstatements? Now if an organization realizes it has not correctly taught or portrayed an event in its past history that caused hurt to others, even though they did not participate but rather turned a blind eye, do you think this organization would have a moral responsibility to account for false information previously taught?

By the way, both "wren" and "just reading" seem to be well read on MM subject.

"By the way, both "wren" and "just reading" seem to be well read on MM subject" TRUE STORY, from my experience anything they write about they most generally know what they are talking about.

Thank You James Just Reading, You are welcome.

According to 'all' the Paiute, Shoshone, Goshute, Ute, Sioux and Seminole Elders that I have sat with the fire, consider the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the most lost of Christian Churches. Many of these elders were baptized into the LDS faith, primarily because of Mormon Church leader's words. According to these Elders "we soon learned that their (Mormons) words were empty, their words were an attempt to satisfy their ravishing dog appetite, claiming they were the friends of our people, we soon understood, all they wanted was sole possession of Mother Earths lands and water. Just look around you James and you will see what we speak is true."

The inner mountain west American Native people 'must' forgive the atrocities and cultural genocide that have been perpetrated upon them by the Mormons for a true transforming cultural event. It seems the L.D.S. faith leaders are so intoxicated by their good works and their elaborate campaign to cover-up and denying any wrong doing condemns them to repeat these atrocities.

In my opinion, following the cultural "forgiving" process, the American Native people and their allies will blossom like a rose and become a beam empowering light that will influence the entire world to live more in harmony with one another. I wrote this story to give one way of resolving the seething hatred the American Native people of the inner mountain west have for the Mormons.

My Gift
In the summer of 1848, thirteen Mormon pioneers were in the middle of a twenty-six-day journey across a Utah desert when they were attacked by a band of thirty "enraged" Ute warriors. These particular settlers were substantially armed with rifles and with an abundance of ammunition. They immediately made a fortified circle with their carts and wagons chained together to defend themselves. Over the three-day attack, most of the migrating settlers were killed. By the early morning light of the fourth day, the Ute's for some unknown reason retreated and left their dead behind. Only three settlers, a woman and two men, survived. All of their horses were stolen or killed.

As the settlers sorted through the carnage, and with the thick smell of death, they found only a meager amount of provisions and water that could possibly sustain them for about eight or nine more days. Not knowing if any Ute warriors were nearby, the settlers had resigned themselves to joining their dead family members and friends, through exposure, starvation and / or the lack of water. Just then, a faint moan was heard several yards outside of their encampment, seemingly from a young child. The woman, against the warnings of the men, left the fortification and shortly returned, carrying a young Ute child, who was near death. The men wanted to kill the boy, but the woman would not allow it. Instead, she nursed the boy by sharing their scant water supply with him and dressed his wounds. Because of the woman's care, over the next few days, the boy's wounds began to heal, but he would, only occasionally, regain a sluggish unconsciousness and then fell back into a quasi-coma.

A day or so later, the Ute warriors returned, catching the Mormons by surprise. As the warriors prepared to kill the remaining settlers, the young boy's voice could be heard, saying in his language, "Father, they saved me from death and shared water with me." Startled and amazed at hearing his son's voice, the tallest of the warriors softened his heart and requested that the other warriors withdraw from the two men and woman. The pioneer's lives, for the moment, had been spared.

After thoroughly inspecting the child's condition, the father carefully picked his son up, while still holding his war club. Carefully cradling his child against his broad bare chest, the father, with a stoic look, in his tear filled eyes, walked to the side of his beautifully painted horse and carefully lifted his boy and gently placed him onto the bare back of this magnificent animal. With the horse's bridle in his right hand and his 'war' club in his left, he turned away. As the father and boy left the encampment, without a word or even a glance at the settlers, the warrior dropped his club. The other Ute's slowly, also in silence, turned away and left the pioneers.

After four freezing nights and five torrid days had passed, the settlers were in the hands of death. One of the men imagined an image of a person on horseback, with two other horses quietly gazing at him in a seemly ghost like manner. With a dazed and feeble cry "Oh, Lord," waking the other man and woman from their deathlike slumbers, as the rider hovered over them.

The pioneers were barely able to discern that the rider was a young Ute Warrior and not an illusion. The nearly naked Ute Brave dismounted his horse; he knelled next to the woman and with his moistened fingers, gently dampened the woman's lips, eyes and face. He then did the same with each of the men. Very softly, in broken English, he said, "These horses and food are gifts from my father and mother."

The settlers slowly began to garner some feelings of hope that they were not going to be killed or die in this arid desert. However, the woman and the men began to murmur that there were 'only three horses'. After a few moments of quietly listening to the pioneers' voice this fearful concern, the young Ute Warrior stood and with broken English responded, "Yes, there are only three horses. The horses are a 'gift' from my father while the food is a 'gift' from my mother's people."

He then respectfully said "the walk to my village is 'my gift' and turned and began his journey.

Little confused, how did the pioneers "find" a ute baby in the middle of the desert?

James? Anyone?

It was sometimes the practice of Natives for women to accompany the raiding party to cook for the men, and to nurse those who were wounded as they returned home.

Sometimes these women were accompanied by infants or small children they were still nursing.

They usually remained in the camp during the attack, but sometimes followed the warriors to watch from what they considered to be a safe distance. It is possible that such a woman was wounded, or killed by a stray shot, and that the tot crawled a distance away.

Lovie wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
[b
3. The article I posted did answer Lovie's question...and quite a number of questions which have been posed in the past. If someone asks a question...I am not above checking out the available resources and offering suggestions and assistance.

No, it did not, just as your post about my comments you said were incorrect you still have not answered how.

Proof is dovie is still wondering if gaurd means danite, your long winded diatribe clifford clavin-esque post DID NOT answer that question. You are not an honest person with your claims of answering questions, when in fact they don't answer a thing.

I got it. sorry you didn't. read the post again...

Then why did you ask Wren just a few posts ago the same questions if the post from Jaye earlier answered it?

Dovie is as dovie does, I'm not a smart women.

I received a PM from Dubbs about a PM I sent to him. What a chump.

Message from Dubbs
August 26, 2008 - 01:55 pm delete
block user archive

[deleted without being read]
__________
(My message to Dubbs) Why would I give you my name and address, Dubbs, after all of your threats and stalkings?

==============================

Dubbs is simply unable to agree to disagree agreeably.

Dubbs wrote:
Lovie wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
[b
3. The article I posted did answer Lovie's question...and quite a number of questions which have been posed in the past. If someone asks a question...I am not above checking out the available resources and offering suggestions and assistance.

No, it did not, just as your post about my comments you said were incorrect you still have not answered how.

Proof is dovie is still wondering if gaurd means danite, your long winded diatribe clifford clavin-esque post DID NOT answer that question. You are not an honest person with your claims of answering questions, when in fact they don't answer a thing.

I got it. sorry you didn't. read the post again...

Then why did you ask Wren just a few posts ago the same questions if the post from Jaye earlier answered it?

Dovie is as dovie does, I'm not a smart women.

Lovie is a kind and smart and sweet woman. She will discover that her attempt to engage you, Dubbs, in rational discussion is not worthwhile.

Why? You are not rational and you can't discuss, only yell and berate others. Simply, you are an asshole, and that's all there is to it. What is worse, you have your head often stuck up your ass, and that is where your LMA (licking my ass) and KMA (kissing my ass) comments originate.

Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
The Churches Modus operandi (M.O.) seems to have worked more successfully in the Inter-Mountain West then it did in Missouri, where they actually got the United States government to massively murder American Native people (Bear River Massacre) and eventually protected the Mormons squatter rights in assuming control of the many fertile valleys and main water sources (Las Vegas and etc.)of the far West.

This is in contradiction to your past comments about ownership of land, and the native american belief that you don't believe you own the land. So how can you say that your land was taken, if you don't own it to begin with?


And the church got the US government to murder people? Come on James, your getting ridiculous now, the US government disliked the Mormons in those days, there is no way they would murder people for them.

Here is a quote from Brigham Young on the subject...

"A significant policy established by Brigham Young at the time recommended that the Mormon settlers establish friendly relationships with the surrounding American Indian tribes, particularly with a policy to "feed them rather than fight them" Shoshoni Frontier, p. 17


Your view of history is a bit of Jame

The Native American belief regarding ownership of land was this:

They believed that the earth was their mother, and that rather than believing that the land belonging to them...they believed that THEY belonged to the land.

This did not stop some rivalry between bands regarding hunting territories...but this rivalry was necessary for survival, and to prevent decimation of their prey through over hunting.

Most of the Natives were nomadic, and didn't settle in one area for 12 months out of the year, but would follow the buffalo herds to hunt, and jerk meat and harvest and cure hides...and would then travel back to their winter campgrounds...although there were tribes in certain areas who were not nomadic, because the area they lived in provided for their needs year round.

As far as what James said about the Mormons influencing the government to murder Native Americans at Bear Creek...he was partly correct.

Even though the government had no great love of Mormons, and even though Brigham Young had announced that he would rather feed the Indians than to fight them...the Mormon settlements and other white settlements put a great strain upon the resources of the land, and resulted in the unrest of the local tribes.

And with the murder of a son of a local Shoshone chief who happened to be fishing in the wrong place at the wrong time and was suspected of the theft of a Mormon settler's stray horse...hostilities commenced, and the federal government was ordered to settle the issue.

You would do well to do some research on the issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_River_Massacre

I have read that, and it in no way says the Mormons influenced the government to attack and kill the indians, if YOU read the link you gave, you would see there was many things that influenced the attack. The Mormons influenceing them to attack as not mentioned. Nice try jaye, but you need to take your own advice and do some research yourself.

Take a deep breath and try to think for a moment.

Smithfield was a Mormon settlement. It was a Mormon settler who after missing a horse, accused the young son of a Shoshone chief of stealing his horse. This lad had been fishing at Summit Creek right about when the Mormon discovered his horse to be missing.

Robert Thornley, an English immigrant tried to defend the lad, by pointing out that he had quite a line of fish on a line, and could not have been stealing a horse, but to no avail. A jury of Mormons tried the youth and hanged him.

This angered the Shoshone Chief, and he retaliated by making a raid and killing a couple of the Merrill family's sons as they were out gathering wood.

There were a number of attacks on settlers and immigrants.

George A. Smith, in the official Journal History of the LDS Church, wrote:

"It is said that Col. Connor is determined to exterminate the Indians who have been killing the Emigrants on the route to the Gold Mines in Washington Territory. Small detachments have been leaving for the North for several days. If the present expedition copies the doings of the other that preceded it, it will result in catching some friendly Indians, murdering them, and letting the guilty scamps remain undisturbed in their mountain haunts."

Good...so Smith realized that all tribals were not guilty...some were friendly.

"On the other hand, the Deseret News in an editorial expressed:

"...with ordinary good luck, the volunteers will 'wipe them out.' We wish this community rid of all such parties, and if Col. Connor be successful in reaching that bastard class of humans who play with the lives of the peaceable and law abiding citizens in this way, we shall be pleased to acknowledge our obligations."

As I said Dubbs...even though there was no real love lost between Mormons and the Federal Government...the Mormons were involved in this fray...from the moment a jury of Mormons tried and hanged that Shoshone boy.

If you truly believe that the Mormons cared one whit about the welfare of the Natives...you are more deluded than I originally understood you to be.

The Mormons set the Natives up right and left...and the Mormons were also party to murdering immigrants.

Do you understand that the federal army wasn't just interested in quelling the tribal attacks? But also in discouraging any further attacks on emigrant trains at the hands of the Mormons?

Are you wine bibbing today? Numerous posts you have made today are off topic, make no sense and don't answer questions given.

Now, back on topic, where in your posts does it say that the Mormons influenced the Government to attack and kill the Indians at Bear river???

The problem of fighting amongst the Indians in America was from sea to sea, not just a Mormon immigrant issue, for you to say that fighting in Utah amongst the indians and the Mormons made the government kill at bear river, that's one thing, but to say the Mormons influenced them to kill? That's entirly a false statement.

If you read your article there were other factors, like the worry of the Indians cutting off the trail to California, which had just become a state, and the government wanted to make sure they took care of them. there were many factors leading to the massacre, but none of them lead to a conclusion the Mormons were somehow at fault for the killing as James has inferred.

Dubbs wrote:
Lovie wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
[b
3. The article I posted did answer Lovie's question...and quite a number of questions which have been posed in the past. If someone asks a question...I am not above checking out the available resources and offering suggestions and assistance.

No, it did not, just as your post about my comments you said were incorrect you still have not answered how.

Proof is dovie is still wondering if gaurd means danite, your long winded diatribe clifford clavin-esque post DID NOT answer that question. You are not an honest person with your claims of answering questions, when in fact they don't answer a thing.

I got it. sorry you didn't. read the post again...

Then why did you ask Wren just a few posts ago the same questions if the post from Jaye earlier answered it?

Dovie is as dovie does, I'm not a smart women.

Help me out here did i miss something???