On Oct. 27, 1838, Missouri Gov. Lilburn Boggs issued an extermination order, directing that Mormons be driven from the state or exterminated. By 1839, virtually all Mormons had been driven from the state.
[On Oct. 27, 1838, Missouri Gov. Lilburn Boggs issued an extermination order, directing that Mormons be driven from the state or exterminated. By 1839, virtually all Mormons had been driven from the state.]
This is exactly the kind of half assed history that needs to be debated on Free Republic and NOT censored. You darn well know that Sydney Rigdon’s “Salt Sermon” to the Danite Mormon vigilantes contained an anti-Gentile extermination order PRIOR to Gov. Boggs order. And you very well know that the Mormons went on a rampage burning through Davies County after Rigdon and Smith incited the burning of Gentile towns. And you very well know that there was a battle at Crooked River where the Mormons ambushed a state militia troop. And you very well know that at Far West, the entire defending camp of 1000 Mormons could have been “exterminated” BUT WERE NOT!
And the reason they WERE NOT exterminated was in part because Smith was coerced or cajoled into surrendering, because he would have let his whole congregation die. And the other reason there was no extermination carried out, was because Bogg’s order WAS CONSIDERED DEFENSIVE, and despite the animosity of Gentiles who had been burned out, the State Militia General in charge just wanted the Mormon followers freed from being led like sheep by the megalomaniac Smith. In fact, if there was a true extermination order in place from Boggs, Joseph Smith, Sydney Rigdon, Parley Pratt, and a bunch of others would have been executed instead of being sent to Liberty jail.
But of course, the Anti-Gentile groups of Mormon apologists here such as yourself are rarely called to account for leaving out three quarters of the history so they can promote their agenda that they are always the victims and that all Gentiles are murderous bigots.
Hummm, a replay of what went on at Far West and Nauvoo is occurring here, less the bloodletting. At Nauvoo Smith tried to silence the press, just as jveritas is trying to silence the press here.
Now, if left up to jveritas, your ‘nasty, vicious insinuation’ would never be challenged because I would be banned for pointing out the historical facts (and yes, I have tons of original citations if anyone is interested). Which is all well and fine, but Hillary doesn’t play by your rules, Mitt’s beliefs will all be fair game if he can’t defend them (Huckabees too).