August 17, 2010

Firedoglake deploys mockery of Mormons to criticize the Mormon Harry Reid for opposing the the mosque near Ground Zero.

Making the cliché move of anti-Mormon bigots everywhere, Attaturk homes in on the undewear, titling his post "That’s no Sacred Undergarment, it’s 'Depends.'"

It's a very short post. Other than the reference to Reid's interest in reelection —  that's something we all thought of, right? — there's a question that I take as a rhetorical question meant to accuse Reid of inconsistency:
By the way Harry, I imagine you were up front in making sure the Mormon Church didn’t build some sort of Memorial at the site of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, because that would be, y’know, offensive to the memories of the victims for the same reasons?
You may need to do a little research to feel the bite that criticism. In the implicit analogy, 1. Mormans are to Muslims as the Mountain Meadow Massacre is to the WTC attack and 2. the memorial at the Mountain Meadows Massacre site is to the Mountain Meadows Massacre as the mosque near the WTC site is to the WTC attack.

I don't really see how the analogy holds up. As I understand it — and please correct me if I'm wrong — the Mountain Meadows memorial is a monument to the victims of the massacre (which occured in 1857). It was put up by Mormons in recent years, and, though today's Mormons were born long after the event and could not possibly have had a causal role in the massacre, they nevertheless take it upon themselves to express regret for what happened. Indeed, there is debate among Mormons about whether the apologies have gone deep enough.

An accurate analogy would be if today's Mormons put their efforts into making public statements informing us that they are not the ones who committed the massacre and that the vast majority of Mormons don't advocate doing that sort of thing, and then they wanted to build a place of worship for themselves near the site of the massacre which they want us to honor because of the way they would be making a show of the moderation of their form of Mormonism.

Come on, Attaturk! You can't even picture Mormons doing that, and certainly if they did, there would be screams of horror and disgust!

97 comments:

GMay said...

Come on, it's FDL. Did you expect quality of any sort?

The Drill SGT said...

On the Meadows Monument, Wiki also adds:

Starting in 1988 descendants of both the Fancher-Baker party victims and the Mormon participants collaborated with the Mountain Meadows Association to design and dedicate a new monument in the meadows; this monument was completed in 1990

So 150 years later both the victims and the killers (descendents thereof) collaborate on a joint effort to build bridges, etc etc etc.

sort of like how the Park51 Muslims got buyin from the 9/11 victims families before they announced their Mosque??

/sarc off

Mark O said...

Mormons should start killing people who offend them. Like they used to.

At least, then they could get First Amendment protection from this bullshit.

Moose said...

Paging Andrew Sullivan! Compulsive posting opportunity!

Geoff Matthews said...

On the mosque, I'm of two minds here. They ARE free to build where they can. I don't believe that ground zero is sacred, I like them to build the d*mn tower(s) already, and move on. I do believe that radical Islam is currently the biggest external threat to the US, and that moderate Islam too often ignores or excuses the excesses of their spiritual brethren.
This mosque/cultural center could accomplish a lot by dedicating a floor to the dangers of extremism, effectively condemning the actions of those who carried this mission out, along with suicide bombers, etc. I don't think it will happen.

As far as ripping on Harry Reid, this is an example of the left eating their own. Reid won't be the last, and the likes of FDL will make it harder for practicing Mormons (or social conservatives of any stripe) to be members of the Democratic party IF they dominate the conversation.

Quayle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Geoff Matthews said...

Mark O,

Mormons did not make it a practice to kill people who offended them.

The Mountain Meadows Massacre occurred either because
a) a group of settlers passed through making threats against the Mormons living their and poisoned their wells OR
b) a group of settlers had stuff that the locals wanted to steal.

The evidence that Brigham Young directed the attack is lacking, and rumours of Mormon ninjas (such as in A Study in Scarlett) never have panned out.

HDHouse said...

Harry Reid should retire forthwith and I would write the letter myself except he is in an election with the perfect fool and as bad as I think Reid is the alternative is far worse.

Nobody has any say on this matter or should say anything on this matter past the government (federal) saying this is a constitutional right and the local (city) government/boards giving the up or down on zoning and land use. It should be viewed as just another building and Reid may not like where it is being built but I haven't ever seen him in NYC and I doubt he could find 45 Broadway with a Magellan.

William said...

Win-win: If the builders of the planned mosque instead donate those funds for flood relief to Pakistani victims, those opposed to the mosque will agree to match those monies.

Quayle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Quayle said...

Here is the Mormon Church's official statement at the dedication of the memorial, given by Henry B. Eying, now in the First Presidency.

I would love to hear something similar from a Muslim.

But I would point out that, unlike the Islamic religion, the Mormons church has a single world wide leadership of 15 people that sets doctrine and is able to speak for the entire church.

"Dear Friends—

"I speak today, by assignment, on behalf of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In so doing, I express their appreciation for the invitation to participate on this program.

"It is important and appropriate that we meet together on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. We gather as relatives of the massacre victims and perpetrators and as unrelated but interested and sympathetic parties.

"We gather to remember and to honor those whose lives were taken prematurely and wrongly in this once lush and pastoral valley....

"We express profound regret for the massacre carried out in this valley 150 years ago today and for the undue and untold suffering experienced by the victims then and by their relatives to the present time.

"A separate expression of regret is owed to the Paiute people who have unjustly borne for too long the principal blame for what occurred during the massacre. Although the extent of their involvement is disputed, it is believed they would not have participated without the direction and stimulus provided by local Church leaders and members.

"We know, too, that many of those who carried out the massacre were haunted all their lives by what they did and saw on that unforgettable day. They and their relatives have also suffered under a heavy burden of guilt. No doubt Divine Justice will impose appropriate punishment upon those responsible for the massacre. Nevertheless, our continued prayer for their relatives is that knowledge of a God who is both just and merciful will bring a measure of peace to their souls.

"In 1999, President Gordon B. Hinckley returned and joined with many of you in dedicating the monument that stands near our place of assembly today. The Church has worked with descendant groups since then to maintain the monument and surrounding property and continues to improve and preserve these premises and to make them attractive and accessible to all who visit. We are committed to do so in the future.

"Having reflected and commented on both the past and future of this hallowed meadow, we conclude by expressing our love and desire for reconciliation to all who have in any way been affected by what occurred at Mountain Meadows 150 years ago today. May the God of Heaven, whose sons and daughters we all are, bless us to honor those who died here by extending to one another the pure love and spirit of forgiveness which His Only Begotten Son personified, is our prayer in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Quayle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Quayle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Quayle said...

"I would love to hear something similar from a Muslim."

And, of course, maybe there have been such statements after 9/11 of which I am simply unaware.

PatCA said...

They're just haters.

They got a lot worse with the Bush years. I wonder why they haven't calmed down since he left tho. They treat Palin and her kids just like they treated Bush. Is BDS a permanent condition?

TMink said...

Well, Mormons believe in Christ as the Messiah. As such, they are open to slander and attacks that people who deny the divinity of Christ are not targeted for.

Trey

Greg said...

I think the Mars Rover had more success in the search for intelligent life than Ann could by reading FDL

tim maguire said...

Prof., you raise an important issue that could use some fleshing out. How much responsibility does the average Muslim hold for atrocities committed in Islam's name? Swap out the terms for virtually any group and any atrocity done in their name and the answer would be clear, wouldn't it?

Ultimately, Islamic terrorism must be opposed and stopped by Muslims themselves (for who but a Muslim can fairly say that Whabbism and violence in its name is not true Islam?), but that's not what we see happening.

Instead great pains are taken to ensure that they bear no responsibility at all, they are not even required to disclaim religious violence. They carry an assumption of innocence that is not extended to any other group in a similar situation.

Quayle said...

Here's the middle part I left out.

"We believe it is our obligation to understand and learn from the past. For this reason, the Church responded favorably several years ago to the request of three experienced and able historians, Ronald W. Walker, Richard E. Turley, Jr., and Glen M. Leonard, to cooperate with their researching of a book about the awful event that occurred here a century and a half ago. The book they are writing is nearly complete and will be published in coming months by Oxford University Press under the title Massacre at Mountain Meadows.

"Although they are Church employees, the authors have retained full editorial control and have drawn their own conclusions from the exhaustive body of historical material they assembled. They have been given full access to all relevant materials held by the Church. Two of the significant conclusions they have reached are (1) that the message conveying the will and intent of Brigham Young not to interfere with the immigrants arrived too late, and (2) that the responsibility for the massacre lies with local leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the regions near Mountain Meadows who also held civic and military positions and with members of the Church acting under their direction.

"Although no event in history can fully be known, the work of these three authors has enabled us to know more than we ever have known about this unspeakable episode. The truth, as we have come to know it, saddens us deeply. The gospel of Jesus Christ that we espouse, abhors the cold-blooded killing of men, women, and children. Indeed, it advocates peace and forgiveness. What was done here long ago by members of our Church represents a terrible and inexcusable departure from Christian teaching and conduct. We cannot change what happened, but we can remember and honor those who were killed here.

garage mahal said...

Wonder if Harry will get around to that ridiculous birthday cake looking temple thing on the rim in Billings MT. Yes I've seen it, and yes it is ridiculous.

Fen said...

Mormons did not make it a practice to kill people who offended them.

And if they did, the Libtards over at FireDogLake wouldn't have the balls to mock them.

When is the last time a Leftist "spoke truth to [Islam]" ?? Have they ever?

GMay said...

HDHouse said: "Nobody has any say on this matter or should say anything on this matter past the government (federal) saying this is a constitutional right and the local (city) government/boards giving the up or down on zoning and land use. It should be viewed as just another building and Reid may not like where it is being built but I haven't ever seen him in NYC and I doubt he could find 45 Broadway with a Magellan."

Shorter HDHouse:

"The First Ammendment should only apply to those with governent-approved opinions."

wv: butgazes (no, seriously)

Fen said...

Best idea I've heard so far is to build an inter-faith "mosque" at the ste instead.

Christians, Jews and Muslims all worshipping God under the same roof.

But the Moderate Extremists who claim the mosque is all about "reaching out" wont have any of that.

Scott M said...

For the love of God...if we can't pull our collective shit together long enough to somehow figure out how to rebuild St Nicholas' tiny little church before allowing a brand spankin' new mosque to get the fast-track government treatment, what hope is there?

The sippy cup, apparently, is half empty.

shoutingthomas said...

The loony left always seems to want to embrace American's enemies.

In Woodstock, the left is now ardently pro-Hamas, and the trendy religion is now Islam.

Buddhism was long the favorite religion. Christianity, of course, intolerable. This tradition continues among young hipsters. At the gym last night, I heard a young woman and man trying to pick each other up. They were discussing the advanced spirituality of Tibetans and Asian Indians, who are not so materialistic and time-bound as crass Christian capitalists.

According to the loony left, America is always wrong, evil and greedy. There is no such thing as an enemy, but America's current enemy is always cool.

And, it's the sanctimonious preaching of the hipsters is always about getting in the pants of the opposite sex, or (these days) the same sex.

Oligonicella said...

TMink --

"As such, they are open to slander and attacks that people who deny the divinity of Christ are not targeted for."

And the others are open to other slanders and attacks, many times by those affirming the divinity. It's called "The world is full of assholes and no group is granted immunity from them being members."

shoutingthomas said...

They got a lot worse with the Bush years. I wonder why they haven't calmed down since he left tho. They treat Palin and her kids just like they treated Bush. Is BDS a permanent condition?

The world isn't perfect. The loony left is always pissed off because the world isn't perfect.

We owe them Utopia.

Careless said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Careless said...

How many of these newspapers, blogs, etc defending the placement of the mosque published/printed/displayed the Mohammad cartoons in posts/articles they wrote on the controversy?

edutcher said...

My God, why did they omit the Avenging Angels and all the references to 'outhouse harems'?

They certainly threw in everything else from "Roughing It."

Geoff Matthews said...

Mark O,

Mormons did not make it a practice to kill people who offended them.

The Mountain Meadows Massacre occurred either because
a) a group of settlers passed through making threats against the Mormons living their and poisoned their wells OR
b) a group of settlers had stuff that the locals wanted to steal.

The evidence that Brigham Young directed the attack is lacking, and rumours of Mormon ninjas (such as in A Study in Scarlett) never have panned out.


The trial of several Mormon militiamen basically puts stories of poisoned water in the rumor category.

Mormon ninjas?

I think you're talking about the Avenging Angels, who were Mormon fanatics working gunfighters (for lack of a better term) to expunge sins, mostly by other Mormons. They did exist, although whether they really participated in Mountain Meadows is unlikely.

If Mark Twain is any indication, the Mormons had plenty of attitude when it came to the Gentiles and Brigham Young took a Yassir Arafat-like stand on the matter, telling the outside world he was against them and spreading the word in Utah that such practice was a good thing.

lemondog said...

Are they intent on creating/feeding anti-Mormon sentiment with the longer term objective of paring down 2012 presidential candidates by eliminating Romney as a viable candidate?

AC245 said...

Making the cliché move of anti-Mormon bigots everywhere, Attaturk homes in on the undewear, titling his post "That’s no Sacred Undergarment, it’s 'Depends.'"

I wonder how long till the deranged denizens there start photoshopping pictures of Harry Reid in blackface, as was done to Joe Lieberman.

GMay and Greg are right: FDL is a cesspool of a blog, written and patronized by exactly the sort of people you'd expect to find hanging around a cesspool.

Hoosier Daddy said...

tim maguire at 11:01 is a thread win.

Last paragraph sums up the double standard about as succinctly as you can get.

Pogo said...

More evidence of the clash of civilizations.

Or more correctly, the clash of Western civilization with Islamic barbarism.

A.W. said...

i just keep wondering... if this is supposed to bring us together, why not name it something that can unite us. like name it for muslim who died fighting terror. or at least a muslim killed by terrorists. or one who lives bravely in defiance of terror. there are plenty who fit the bill, including a bunch who were pulled out of the rubble at ground zero who were not involved in the attacks.

instead they pick cordoba house.

Oh, and the anti-semitic twitter messages are not helping that unification, you know?

Tom said...

FYI, the mormoncoffee site you linked to as evidence of debate among Mormons as to whether the apology for Mountain Meadows went far enough is an anti-Mormon site run by evangelicals.

I've been paying attention to the actual Mormon blogosphere for several years and I don't remember there being much debate on that point, although I could have missed it. I do remember a lot of professional anti-Mormons trying to hold that incident of 150 years ago against the contemporary church. They even made a stupid movie about it (September Dawn).

aronamos said...

Before you whitewash the Mormons too much here, remember that they slaughtered the adults, kidnapped their children, blamed the Paiutes and left the bodies in that meadow for years. It was an act of barbarism if not terrorism, and it took the church 150 years to say they were sorry. Maybe in 2151 we'll get an apology from the Islamists.

Michael said...

HD House: So when the mega WalMart is planned for the east end of long island the people should just shut up, right?

TMink said...

How much whitewash does it take to cover a 150 year old event? Precious little.

Trey

shirley elizabeth said...

What's funny is when I first heard about the mosque my first thought was about the outcry that would come from the LDS Church building a cahpel or something on the Mountain Meadows site.

But also, the Massacre wasn't done or ordered by the Church, it was done by individual members. Granted, members that held position within the Church, and members that all ought to have been tried and punished for their wrongs, but still, not acting in the name of the Church, as those in the name of Islam do.

Hoosier Daddy said...

the Massacre wasn't done or ordered by the Church, it was done by individual members. Granted, members that held position within the Church, and members that all ought to have been tried and punished for their wrongs, but still, not acting in the name of the Church, as those in the name of Islam do.

Well in terms of trying to draw atrocity comparisons, I'd say the left is at least getting something a bit more current than the Crusades.

J said...

The Mountain Meadow massacre was a tragedy, though hardly the worst in 19th century USA (see Twain's Roughing It for details...or at least entertaining satire of LDS-land...featuring Brigham Young, his 20+ wifeys, and 80 or so kiddies, playing tin whistles...).

The real issue pertains to the bogus "visions" of Joseph Smith himself. Objecting to the deceit and bogus mysticism involved in the creation of the COLDS does not imply one's a bigot. It may mean that a person objects....to deceit and bogus mysticism (ie the Angel Moroni, Golden plates, seer stones, etc).

Maybe when a Sen. Reid or Mitt Romneyoid cough up...the Golden Plates (las Placas!) some of us will change our opinion of the LDS cult.

Scott M said...

@J

Maybe when a Sen. Reid or Mitt Romneyoid cough up...the Golden Plates (las Placas!) some of us will change our opinion of the LDS cult.

Doesn't that make you a COLDS agnostic?

Fen said...

in terms of trying to draw atrocity comparisons

This is also key in understanding how the Left thinks. They must sense some shame or wrongness in attacking Ried's oppostion to the mosque, hence their need to find and exagerate an instance to provide the needed equivalance.

Most of the "x is more evil" from the Left is like urban legend. They've created Myth to justify their hatred of the right, and usually that Myth was created in the first place to serve as a moral counterweight to their own "evil"

Fen said...

So in a convoluted way, the Left is self-loathing. Ha.

Randy said...

Are they intent on creating/feeding anti-Mormon sentiment with the longer term objective of paring down 2012 presidential candidates by eliminating Romney as a viable candidate?

Yes, they are. If Romney is the GOP nominee, I expect a particularly ugly campaign orchestrated by many of these same impassioned advocates of religious freedom and tolerance joined by their brethren who selectively fight bigotry and hate speech. As Mormons and Mormonism are fair game for them, their true natures are usually revealed by their antics.

J said...

Rational Americans should also object to those right-wing nuts who insist anyone who objects to mormon theocracy is a ..."leftist" (as in commie pinko). Madison, as in James had nothing but scorn for religious zealots of the Joseph Smith sort ("enthusiasts", as Madison called them).

Romneyoid doesn't stand a chance anyway, even with a new makeover and bodacious hair-do.

HDHouse said...

Hey - I think it is time for a little respect.

Larry J said...

At least one American muslim gets it:

As a Muslim desperate to reform his faith, your remarks take us backwards from the day that my faith will come into modernity. I do not stand to eliminate Imam Rauf’s religious freedom; I stand to make sure that my children’s religious freedom will be determined by the liberty guaranteed in the American Constitution and not by clerics or leaders who are apologists for shar’iah law and will tell me what religious freedom is.

‘Park 51′, ‘The Cordoba House’ or whatever they are calling it today should not be built, not because it is not their right to do it – but because it is not right to do it.” Mr. President, your involvement in this issue is divisive not uniting. Your follow-up stating that ‘you will not speak to the wisdom of the construction of that mosque and center’ indicates a passive-aggressive meddling on your part that only marginalizes those Muslim and non-Muslim voices against it while pretending to understand both sides of the debate.

Randy said...

J: Sounds like you would be quite comfortable living in the nineteenth century. Unfortunately for you, this is the twenty-first century.

Randy said...

HD House: Thank you for posting that remarkable and moving piece.

HDHouse said...

Michael said...
"So when the mega WalMart is planned for the east end of long island the people should just shut up, right?"

Actually Michael there is one in Riverhead that serves a good chunk of the population. What is your point?

Anglelyne said...

ST: They were discussing the advanced spirituality of Tibetans and Asian Indians, who are not so materialistic and time-bound as crass Christian capitalists.

Some things never change. But sometimes these types are fun to mess with. I remember years ago being solemnly informed by one such type that "Christianity had no mystical tradition". Now, I am not a believer, consider myself rather shamefully ignorant of the history of Christianity, and would say I only know as much about its traditions as can be picked up by osmosis and tangential reference. But even I could rattle off a list of illustrious christian mystics, and a few titles from the classic literature, to this airhead.

The response? Same as one gets from fundies when they're confronted by a contradicting fact: a glazed-over, "does not compute", look of confusion before they quickly switch gears and move on to another topic.

J said...

Randy with his usual Non-sequitur.

Verification remains important--as does Madison's objection to religious zealots. And if anyone's stuck in 19th century, it would be...the COLDS. It's just that they've got a lot more shekels and better PR people now than when King Brigham ruled the roost.

Anglelyne said...

J: The real issue pertains to the bogus "visions" of Joseph Smith himself. Objecting to the deceit and bogus mysticism involved in the creation of the COLDS does not imply one's a bigot.)

No, as long as one is not applying "theocrat" only to selected purveyors of bogus visions and angelic visitations.

AC245 said...

J said...

Randy with his usual Non-sequitur.

Verification remains important--as does Madison's objection to religious zealots. And if anyone's stuck in 19th century, it would be...the COLDS. It's just that they've got a lot more shekels and better PR people now than when King Brigham ruled the roost.


Anyone know why Cedarford isn't using his usual account?

Cedarford said...

That was a pretty goodcalling out of attaturk by Althouse.

And to the real Attaturks credit, he was a war hero and then an enormously effective Westernizer of the defeated Ottoman Empire. That wanted most institutions of state and society forged as a "nothing to do with Islam" secular, temporal sphere.

Cedarford said...

AC245 is actually my other handle here.

Julie C said...

I said it before on this blog: let the Mormons build a temple on Castro Street in San Francisco and let the howling begin.

There will be no discussion of religious freedom then.

Why are these FireDogLake types so juvenile? Depends? That's the best they've got?

Why don't they mock Muslims? Oh yeah, I forgot. Only mock those who aren't inclined toward head chopping.

Scott M said...

AC245 is actually my other handle here.

Well, that certainly cleared that up.

tim maguire said...

Hoosier, I agree that it's nice to see the left getting more contemporary, but apparently they are as historically ignorant as ever. The Crusades were nothing more than a particular campaign in the 1,000 year war between the Muslim East and the Christian West.

The Holy Land was Christian for hundreds of years before it became Muslim at the point of a sword. It was Muslim for a couple hundred years before it became Christian again at the point of a sword. And then a couple hundred years later it became Muslim again, again at the point of a sword. That's just how it worked back then.

If you're a They Might Be Giants fan, then you know it was Constantinople before it was Istanbul. The Muslims built the biggest canon the world had yet seen and used it to blast apart Constantinople's walls so they could rush in and kill everyone. And only then did it become Istanbul.

Shall we attack Charles Martel for using the sword to keep France Christian? Why not? Not enough lefties know who he is?

Joe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michael said...

HDHouse: My point was that people very often protest against the construction of facilities they do not like. If you have been awake these last twenty years you would know that many people find WalMarts uncool and go to some lengths to protest their presence in their communities. If you live in Sag Harbor it is quite convenient for you to have a WM in Riverhead, but not so attractive if you have one like right there. I don't consider you overly dense for a liberal but I have room and time to change my mind.

Sigivald said...

Seriously.

Like GMay said, it's Firedoglake.

You expect something other than ahistorical and ignorant flailing at the most convenient thing that looks vaguely like a "no, you are!!!!"?

I don't.

Why even bother to link that place?

Does it actually influence someone, somewhere?

Joe said...

But also, the Massacre wasn't done or ordered by the Church, it was done by individual members.

That's a lie and at the root of the anger that still exists over this episode. The concept of the blood atonement which was being heavily preached during the reformation of 1857 played a heavy hand in the massacre. The massacre itself was planned and organized by the actual Mormon church organization in that part of Utah, not by just a bunch of members acting on their own. THIS HAS BEEN PROVEN.

Brigham Young said "If any miserable scoundrels come here, cut their throats" in refernce to anyone claiming to be responsible for Joseph Smith and Parley Pratt's murders. While I don't believe Young ordered the massacre, he helped create a climate of hate and did not give advanced directive to let these people travel on through unmolested before they traveled through Utah. He also later lied repeatedly about events surrounding the massacre as has the church generally.

An ancestor of mine was directly involved in the initial attack (he plain lied about the second part of the massacre.) I've read a letter written in his hand in which he maintains that they were ordered to carry out the attack by the highest levels of the church to atone for the blood of Joseph Smith and were fully justified in what they did. (He also admits dressing like an Indian so the blame would fall on the them.)

All this is why the bitterness remains; the church denied even basic truths about the attack for 150 years and are still not being honest about it. Worse, the church glosses over just how brutal the massacre was (even the Indians present were disgusted by the brutality.)

My own ancestor should have been executed for what he and his neighbors did.

(BTW, the book referenced above was written by active Mormons, one of whom works for the Church. It's an apologia and mostly worthless as scholarship.)

Pogo said...

The left is very adept at changing the subject.

But whatever you think of Mormons or religion in general, Obama's support of the mosque is going to look very bad for Democrats. New Yorkers on the whole don't seem too thrilled neither.

Same-foot-shootin' if you ask me.

lemondog said...

And to the real Attaturks credit, he was a war hero and then an enormously effective Westernizer of the defeated Ottoman Empire. That wanted most institutions of state and society forged as a "nothing to do with Islam" secular, temporal sphere.

Unfortunately after 80+ years the secularists seem to be losing ground.

doofus said...

What is the world coming to? Do we have no experienced anti-Mormons here? 60+ comments, and not a single mention of the Danites. What is this "Avenging Angel" crap? The Mormons had a super-secret, blessed by God, authorized by Brigham Young, ninja-like group, known as the "Danites", to do all their dirty work.

EVERYONE knows that all the enemies of the church were secretly executed by murder squads of Danites authorized directly by Brigham Young, who personally chose the names of those who would get on the list.

Sheesh. Not only do we not have any decent trolls anymore, we can't even get decent anti-Mormon posters.

Come on people, there are STANDARDS that need to be maintained here!

David

word verification - blest. You are blest that you have an long-time Mormon here to stand up to the plate and take up the slack in the H8ters ranks.

J said...

The Nauvoo legion as it was called (or angels of Death, etc). A private army, actually--Brigham controlled a de facto kingdom for years (and Buchanan sent the US Army out west at one point...and they more or elss turned tail). According to LDS doctrine Utah was (uh,is) just part of the State of Deseret. The plans are to include the entire West (and LDS remains thick even in parts of Cal.). That is, after the Lamanites are defeated (ie, all those who won't submit to mormonacracy).

Most ordinary xtians simply don't have a clue about what real Mormonism involves.

AC245 said...

Cedarford said...

AC245 is actually my other handle here.

8/17/10 1:43 PM


Heh.

I don't know if this was intended as a joke or an insult, but it made me chuckle.

Geoff Matthews said...

Tim,

That gun was actually built by a Hungarian, not a muslim.

Ironically, it's believe that the builder was killed when one of the guns he built blew up.

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

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

AC245 said...

Most ordinary xtians simply don't have a clue about what real Mormonism involves.

And they also don't realize that fire can't melt steel!

Fred4Pres said...

Of course FDL is mocking Mormons. Mormons are there to be Mocked. They are weird like Shakers but without the sense of style and design.

This is how liberals think.

J said...

Is that like humor of some sort? Im pretty sure I know more of modern science than you as well, AC245.

And there are many people who can attest to mormon aggression (if not abuse). Not to say the documented history of racism (and polygamy farther back). Is that kosher witya too AC? Or is this just the usual Foxnews/tea party pep rally, where ...Mormons are against "the left"; ergo, they're OK with me. Sad.

Even a real xtian should object to Mormonism which is not only NOT scriptural, but rife with masonic elements as well. The Mittster for instance has a temple name...oh Brother Shendrazulim. Abracadabra, secret handshake stuff, brutthhr

lemondog said...

State of Deseret map

Uh,oh, there goes Las Vegas.

This says that Mormon leaders want to ordain their president as king of the US and then the world.

Another, uh, oh, there goes Washington DC and congress.

Oh, wait..... that can't be ALL bad!!!!!

shirley elizabeth said...

J, sounds like you don't know what mormonism is about either. And if you're going to say visions and angels can't be true because they can't be proven then you must not believe in any religion.

Randy said...

According to the California Department of Finance the 2008 population of CA is 38 million, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints make up 2% of the population so around 760,000.

One doubts the other 37+ million Californians need lose sleep at night fearing an incipient Mormon theocracy.

Source: Answers.com

Daniel Fielding said...

I see we have a modern day Mormon hater here in the shape of J. Dumbass!!!!

Randy said...

I see we have a modern day Mormon hater here in the shape of J. Dumbass!!!!

His choice of avatars is interesting.

AC245 said...

And there are many people who can attest to mormon aggression (if not abuse). Not to say the documented history of racism (and polygamy farther back). Is that kosher witya too AC? Or is this just the usual Foxnews/tea party pep rally, where ...Mormons are against "the left"; ergo, they're OK with me. Sad.

Even a real xtian should object to Mormonism which is not only NOT scriptural, but rife with masonic elements as well. The Mittster for instance has a temple name...oh Brother Shendrazulim. Abracadabra, secret handshake stuff, brutthhr


Mick has found a worthy challenger in the obsessed deranged conspiracy-theorist competition.

You should demand to see Brigham Young's birth certificate!

Pogo said...

Once we got us some bona-fried modern-day Mormon suicide bombers, I will take the time to note their plans for world domination.

Until then, down with the GZM.

HDHouse said...

@michael

anyone can protest against anything they care to. it is called free speech.

if it is a building they can askt he builders not to build it, protest, boycott and do what they want within the law. they can also protest to planning and zoning boards and all manner of licensing boards down to the n-th degree. that is their right.


i protested the building of a commercial office building at the actual ground zero as i thought that was too cool but i lost that one as i knew i probably would.

i still don't see your point.

Michael said...

HD House: Someone posing as you wrote; "Nobody has any say on this matter or should say anything on this matter past the government (federal) saying this is a constitutional right and the local (city) government/boards giving the up or down on zoning and land use. It should be viewed as just another building and Reid may not like where it is being built but I haven't ever seen him in NYC and I doubt he could find 45 Broadway with a Magellan."

You appeared to take the position that people should shut up about the GZM. I then asked if you were OK with WalMart putting up a store on the east end, etc etc.

I cannot believe that a man who I assume has heard John Adams' "transmigration of souls" would not think it insensitive to place a mosque where they intend to place it.

J said...

Hey Fielding, you're the dumbass, a mason, not to say...seditionist. Apart from the massacre and Joe Smith's documented deceit (as even the evangelicals of the time realized) James Buchanan, hardly a radical leftist, considered Young's mormon regime an act of sedition--as did many other US politicians. It wasn't until around the turn of the century that polygamy ended (and not completely).

It's more like the crypto-Klansmen who hang around Miss Althouse's joint (and spew their fallacies and cheap US History 101) decided that mormonism would help their cause, somehow, or that the LDS wasn't nearly as bad as ...lib-rawls. Ie, the usual fundamentalist machiavellian hustle.

doofus said...

Pogo said:

Once we got us some bona-fried modern-day Mormon suicide bombers, I will take the time to note their plans for world domination.


Oh, you poor person. We are MUCH more insidious than that. Instead of suicide bombers, we send missionaries bearing jello cakes. You will be inundated with food until you join just to save your sanity.

Fear the jello.

Randy said...

Instead of suicide bombers, we send missionaries bearing jello cakes. You will be inundated with food until you join just to save your sanity.

Jell-o cakes? They're handing out free Jell-o cakes? No one ever offered me any free Jell-o cakes. But then, none of them have ever taken me up on my offer of some hot coffee or a cold Pepsi.

HDHouse said...

Michael said...
"You appeared to take the position that people should shut up about the GZM."

Yes they should. The zoning board ruled. It is NOT a federal issue.
It is not at ground zero. It is blocks away. I has been operating as a community center and a mosque for quite a while now.

This is a strawdog argument and just a ploy to wedge the public.

Nothing more.

Daniel Fielding said...

Hey J- looks like you are the stupid one here- bitching about what happened 150 yrs back. When are you going to lay into the Catholics, what with all their involvement in the Inquisition?

Michael said...

HD House: I understand now. It is OK for you to protest an office building but not OK for anybody to protest a mosque. I think I have it. Finally.

J said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
J said...

Any LDS people hereabouts should be required to disclose their.....cult membership, ie LDSness.


That said, I respect Sen. Reid (and his political views for the most part) though don't agree with his views on the Cordoba House (or rather, per 1st Amend. there don't appear to be any grounds for not allowing it. Maybe Miss Althouse, law prof. could clarify.... ).

It's the Mitt Romneyoid and Glenn Beck-bot mormonics we need to be worried about, ie, the Fielding and Randy sorts of LDS crypto-klansmen.

Geoff Matthews said...

J,
I'm a mormon. Should I start wearing a yellow Angel Moroni so you can keep track of me?

J said...

well, that'd be a bit mucho--tho' most holy Nephites probably wouldn't mind pinning LAMANITE stars (yellow, black, red, pink, whatevah) on non-Nephites.

Perhaps some of the honest LDSites around here might discuss the Mormon-Co plans for...jubilee day when they take over that paradise in Missouri or whatever (and subdue the wretched LAMANITEs).

doofus said...

Are you on f*cking drugs? I live in Southern California. Why, in God's name, would I want to move back to a hellhole like Missouri? Hot in the summer, cold in the winter. My god, they even have SNOW there? Any Saints who want to go back to Paradise are welcome to it, in my book.

Besides, property values here haven't recovered yet, and until they do, I am not going ANYWHERE!

Geoff Matthews said...

Jubilee? You mean the scouting Jubilee? You're worried about the Scouting Jubilee?

Dude, you sound worse than that general in Red Dawn.

J said...

How easy it is to indulge in the sophomoric snark. Regardless, Mormons take the LDS form of "rapture" very seriously--ie, they usually have a pantry or basement chock full of tasty mormonic-rapture goods. Oats, honey, canned beef, caffiene free pepsi, etc. Or maybe that's for the final battle with the Lamanites.

Then after the holy Nephites defeat the nasty Lamanites (I sh*t you not), LDS Beulahland arrives (sort of like Lebensraum for the nazis)

Michael said...

Actually, the analogy would be accurate not if in it today's Mormons did so, but if Mormons did so in 1867.