This is the Place II: Brigham, Boston, and the Black-Robed Jesuit

 Previously: Brigham Young and the Holy Grail

In our modern academic milieu, veneration of famous historical figures seems to trump the vigilant approach to history. We are far more prone to the idolization of historical "heroes" than we are to question, scrutinize, or even criticize the narratives we are spoon-fed from our youth. 

The his-stories our feeble, yet all-absorbing minds devour as children have been carefully packaged in all their establishment grandeur, polished with "fact-checked" proof and sanitized by the siren song of peer-reviewing "professionals."  

The uncomfortable truth remains safely hidden within myriad layers of embellished lore, imprisoned just beneath the veneer of institutional pride, a hubris bolstered by the emotional ambiance of the blissful nostalgia of youth. 

It is in such myopia that all myth develops and begins to cement itself into the collective psyche of society, lurking just below the conscious level, waiting patiently to excoriate the brazen heretic who dares to postulate an alternative view. 

This is the very environment that we defenders of Joseph Smith find ourselves in when endeavoring to get to the bottom of Church history, battling against the professional apologizers who are paid to lie and the laypersons who take no thought except to study only what the institution feeds them. 

Yet here we are, spread out across the margins of the Restoration, honestly seeking only for the truth, the raw and unfiltered version of our-story. 

A story without a narrator, bereft of agendas, fitting into no "official" history. A story that just was, and is. A story as it really happened, unkempt, unpolished, and unvarnished, standing awkwardly before us like a naked emperor basking in the sunlight, exposing the secret parts that obliterate our cherished narratives.

And with that, I thank you for being here, for joining me in my quest for truth, and helping me unpack what really went down with Brigham Young and the founding of Salt Lake City. 

The anomalies are coming out of the woodwork, and the narrative is beginning to fall apart. 

I believe that Brigham was led to Salt Lake Valley by the man pictured in the thumbnail image above, Father Pierre de Smet, but before we dive down that rabbit hole, we have to make a pit stop at Boston. 

Let's begin. 

Brigham Goes To Boston

Boston, Massachusetts was founded in 1630, and was named after St. Botolph from Lincolnshire, who lived during the 600s. Many churches were dedicated to Botolph, foremost among them is the largest and oldest church building in England, St. Botolph's Church. As legend has it, it was built in the 1300s, and this amazing structure is still standing today. 

Are we really to believe that a bunch of medieval peasants with hand chisels built this architectural prodigy? 

I mean, this thing is 266 feet tall, how in the world were they able to hoist such heavy blocks of stone to those heights without a modern crane? 

Let's be honest, we don't build structures like this today. Sure, our buildings are tall, but they are painfully plain and square, and they still take years to build with our modern technology. 

According to the official narrative, this was built in 81 years, from 1309 to 1390, and that was just the main building. Construction on the tower didn’t begin until 1450, and was not completed until around 1520. That makes no sense at all. What religious institution or family dynasty would span the building of a single church throughout a 200 year period, allocating financial resources that they will never see a return on in their lifetime? 

No one. (And was this building even a church?) 

The truth is that this building was built by an entirely different civilization, along with many other old-world-style buildings that we see all around the world. Just have a look at the curious workmanship of the interior, it truly evokes wonder and awe in the mind:

That wonder and awe is your mind trying to tell you that the narrative of how this building came about is a bunch of BS. 

The reason I bring this up now is to prepare you for future posts. Architecture will play an enormous role in the historical narrative of Utah. 

But let’s get back to Boston. 

The name Boston means, "Botolph's Stone," which is an interesting name for a city with boat loads of old world buildings, and million upon millions of tons of red brick. City block upon city block is made of this stuff, including the old roads now covered by asphalt, along with a host of historical buildings. It's literally everywhere. 

Has anyone ever asked where all the red brick came from? As the official story goes, until the colonists figured out how to manufacture their own bricks from iron and clay deposits, red bricks were imported by ship from England. When they began producing their own, they say it typically took a crew of six to eight men an entire summer to produce a million bricks... but that was enough for about one large building. 

Sounds plausible enough right?

But what if there is something more to the story? For instance, did you know that red brick is magnetically charged and involves a chemical reaction that mimics human blood? 

This is known as ferric oxidation. It's the process of how iron is oxidated to produce red blood cells. 

One of the functions of red blood cells is to deliver richly oxygenated blood to hungry body tissues. Red blood cells are also magnetically charged, and produce their own energy. We call it prana, or life-force, and it is literally what gets us out of bed in the morning.

 

Blood is also spiritual currency which literally powers the demonic realm. I wrote about that here, which begs the question: is red brick a substitute energy source for red blood? Can it sufficiently charge an area with enough spiritual prana to stir the demonic realm to action? 

Food for thought. But buildings with red brick is a subject for another post. 

Boston was one of the first American cities, so we're told anyway, and home to the very first lodge of English Freemasonry built in the colonies. A man by the name of Henry Price petitioned his English superiors and was granted a charter for the lodge. The fateful year was 1733, an esoteric number indeed (Skull and Bones was established in 1833). The name of the lodge was St. John's, and it was the place where a myriad of famous Masons met, including George Washington, Ben Franklin, and Marquis de Lafayette.

English Freemasonry is the proprietor of the York Rite and its first three degrees. It is also the originator of the advanced degree of the Royal Arch, held by Heber C. Kimball, as I explained in the last post. Kimball worked with Abraham Jonas, the Grand Master over the Illinois area. And where did Jonas get his marching orders from?

I believe they came from Boston, home to "The Mother Lodge of America," where Masonic superiors were directing the antics of the brotherhood all over the nascent nation.

This begs the question: why did Brigham and gang keep going to Boston between 1843 and 1844? What were they up to? Is the official story of establishing branches, doing missionary work, and campaigning for Joseph Smith's presidential candidacy just a cover for something more nefarious?

According to the Joseph Smith Papers, the first missionaries to go to Boston were Samuel Smith and Orson Hyde in 1832. That same year Joseph Smith and Newel K. Whitney also came to the city. Brigham and Joseph Young went in 1836 and baptized 17 people. In 1841, a conference was held there by 8 of the Twelve, then another in 1843, and several more in the summer of 1844 around the time of Joseph's death. 

Needless to say, Joseph and Hyrum were not present at any of the conferences held in Boston by the traveling Twelve, and the minutes don't tell us much, besides a few mundane details. But when you look at the entire timeline, things get a little weird.

The conference of 1843 was held on September 9th at Boylston Hall. Present were Brigham, Heber, George Albert Smith, Wilford Woodruff, and John E. Page. You can read all the boring details in History of the Church: Volume 6, starting on page 11. One thing to keep in mind when were talking about Boston is that Brigham and Heber always seemed to spend considerable time alone together in this red-bricked city. 

This is well documented in the official History of the Church. 

Boylston Hall was built in 1810, in only one year (you'll find when you study elaborate buildings built in the 1800s that many of them were constructed in only a year or two, a stunning feat indeed without power tools, and relying upon horse and buggy to transport building materials. Not to mention the water-powered hydraulic crane wasn't invented until 1838). 

Here is a picture of the now-demolished structure below:

One has to wonder how Brigham and gang could have afforded to rent this 120 ft. long venue for their meetings? Were Church funds allocated? Was Joseph aware? 

One has to wonder, because Joseph seemed to be fine with holding meetings in free venues like the woods. 

The history reads like a travel log, with members of the Twelve splitting up and going to other Eastern cities, but always seeming to reconvene in Boston. What was it about this city that kept bringing them back? 

This pattern is more apparent in 1844, or at least the History of the Church (re-written by Brigham and crew) gives us more details about that fateful year, specifically June to August.

The travel log, recorded in Volume 7 of the History of the Church, and The Joseph Smith Papers, begins on June 22nd of 1844. On this day we are informed that Brigham attended a meeting in Lowell, Massachusetts, but with no other details. No other apostles are named, and many of them were in other cities at the time. What kind of meeting was this? We are not told.

Lowell is a suburb located 23 miles northeast of Boston. I wonder what Brigham was up to that day? Meeting with a secret wife, or perhaps with some Masonic brothers? There was a lodge established in Lowell in 1807 known as the Pentucket Lodge. Eventually, members petitioned for a new name and became the "Ancient York Lodge" in 1852. Today they meet in the building below:

It was supposedly built in 1928, but the only "construction" photos we have show the building already completed with some scaffolding around it.

When you research old buildings you find this pattern repeated often. Strange indeed when the camera was invented by 1816. 

I mean, if you're putting the money and energy into building such an edifice wouldn't you want to document with photographs each of the building phases?

Here is a "construction" photo taken in 1928:

Move along folks. Nothing to see here, just some primitive scaffolding most likely used to paint a building that already existed.

We are never told where the original Pentucket Lodge members met. In my opinion, this building had been there the entire time. 

Have a look at the city hall building that is close by:

This thing is a real beauty, featuring a 180 foot clock tower. Construction on this stunning edifice began in 1890 and was completed in 1893. 

Only 3 years? Are you kidding me?

The first power tools weren't invented until 1895, and the document describing the construction of this building leaves out some very important details... like how many men it took, where the stone came from, how it was hauled to the job site, and other pertinent logistics.

I'm digressing from the topic, but trust me these buildings are a very important part of Brigham Young's history. He is heralded as being the master mind behind organizing the building of a great city in the middle of a desert. In this series I'm going to dismantle that myth piece by piece. 

I'm using Lowell as an example because these buildings are in almost every single city in America. In my opinion, Brigham was attending a Masonic meeting that day in Lowell, making plans with his superiors for how to run the Church after getting rid of Joseph. I can't prove this, it's only a hunch, but because our history has been so whitewashed, hunches become our best guesses.

June 23rd of 1844 found Brigham and Heber preaching in Wilmington, Delaware, but by June 27th, that ominous day of martyrdom, Brigham was back in Boston with his good buddy Wilford Woodruff. 

On this day nearly all of the Twelve, spread out over the East, simultaneously felt a mysterious sadness, but didn't know why. 

Cool story guys, but I'm not buying it.

Here's the breakdown found on pages 132-33 of History of the Church, Volume 7:

Brigham and Wilford, at the time of the martyrdom, "felt depressed in spirits, without knowing the cause."

Heber, traveling by railway from Philadelphia to New York, "felt very mournful as though he had lost some friend, without knowing the cause."

Orson Hyde, with Brigham in the hall at Boston examining maps, "felt very heavy and sorrowful in spirit, and knew not the cause... He retired to the further end of the hall alone, and walked the floor; tears ran down his face." 

Crocodile tears? What’s going on here?

George A. Smith, in Jackson County at the time, "felt unusually cast down and depressed in sprits... repaired [sic] to an oak grove, and called upon the Lord, endeavoring to break the spell of horror which had dominion over his mind... without finding any relief." George's torment lasted throughout the night, and "once it seemed to him that some fiend whispered in his ear, 'Joseph and Hryum are dead; ain't you glad of it?'"

Ok, hold the phone...

I'll tell you what I think... they weren't having melancholic premonitions, they were experiencing the guilt that first-time murderers typically have. They had planned the whole thing in their Secret Chamber meetings, and now that John Taylor and Willard Richards had actually carried it out, they were feeling the shock of knowing that sh*! actually went down that day, and that if they renege now they too could face a similar fate. 

The next one from Parley Pratt is, in my opinion, a smoking gun. Pratt was aboard a canal boat between Utica and Buffalo, on his way to Nauvoo. He too was "much depressed in spirit," and made a very strange statement to his brother who was accompanying him: 

Parley asked him if he had any books or pamphlets containing the gospel of Christ, or the words of life; if so, to put them under lock and key, for the people are not worthy of them for, said Parley, "I feel that the spirit of murder is in the hearts of the people through the land."

Folks, Parley is speaking Masonic language here. The use of "lock and key," and people not being "worthy" of the gospel... the Masonic gospel? Locking up "sacred" truths and hiding them from the profane is Masonic doctrine. And then the strange comment about the spirit of murder, projecting the martyrdom onto an abstraction (the people of the land) and off of the real perpetrators. This is coded language. In my opinion, he is confessing his inside knowledge of the murder to his fellow initiates. 

The spirit of murder indeed.

Let's find out how the Twelve delt with this intense melancholy throughout the remainder of the week. 

Oh, they returned to business as usual? Actually the business ramped up... 

On Saturday June 29th, a conference was held at Franklin Hall in Boston, Brigham Young presided. I wonder what they talked about? The conference resumed Sunday the 30th. 

On July 2nd, a council of the Twelve was held in Franklin Hall. Heber records that he spoke in the morning... "the conference went off well, the brethren realizing they had a good time." 

Good times with the bro's...  

On July 3rd, Brigham and Heber enjoyed some sight-seeing at the Boston museum in the evening after spending the day together. On July 4th, these BFFs, with other friends, enjoyed the fireworks display at Boston commons.

What happened to all the sadness? 

On July 7th, another conference was held in Salem (14 miles northeast of Boston). What was discussed?

On July 8th, not one but three meetings were held at the concert hall in Salem. "The house was full and the brethren felt well."

Man, these guys are having more meetings in a week than a Relief Society presidency...

July 9th. On this day news finally reached the Twelve of the martyrdom. How did they react?

Brigham and Orson Pratt, "did not believe the accounts were correct."

Heber "was unwilling to believe it, though it struck him to the heart."

Wilford was on his way to Maine, but upon hearing immediately came back to Boston.

The next day, July 10th, Brigham and Orson Pratt head up to Lowell. No reason given, just a relaxing 23-mile stroll to Lowell, where as you recall, Brigham was found on June 22nd. 

On July 11th Brigham and Orson head up to Petersboro, New Hampshire, for yet another conference. Brigham records in his journal, "had a good time at the conference all day." 

July 14th. Wilford Woodruff, the only member of the Twelve in Boston that day, attempts to console the saints at Franklin Hall. 

Meanwhile, Heber is in Philadelphia uttering prayers such as, "O Lord, save they servants the Twelve." 

Now suddenly they are fearing for their lives? 

In Petersboro Brigham had preached a sermon about how "the death of one or a dozen could not destroy the priesthood," alluding that he and the others had legitimately succeeded priesthood authority from Joseph. 

Here is something to keep in mind. The saints in these Eastern areas had really only been taught by the Twelve, and they could've been preaching whatever gospel they wanted to these people, prepping and grooming them to accept Brigham and the others as leaders after Joseph was out of the way.

July 16th. Wouldn't you know it Brigham and Orson head back to Boston. On the 18th another apostolic council was held. On the 20th, Heber and Brigham spend yet another day in the bustling city of Boston. On the 23rd, Brigham and Heber are together again (what are Brigham and Heber doing when they are hanging out alone in Boston? We are just not told).

Finally, on July 24, the Twelve head back to Nauvoo, and hardly a day after they arrive, Samuel Smith dies of a mystery disease. 

All I can say are the words of Chris Farley in the movie Black Sheep when he was looking up at the steep mountain slope he just rolled down: 

"What in the hell was that all about?"

Let's move on to De Smet. 

A Robe, a Priest, and a Travel Plan

Pierre De Smet was born in Belgium on January 30th of 1801, and died in St. Louis in 1873. After turning twenty-one he decided to enter the Jesuit Order. The Jesuit's are a deep rabbit hole that I could devote an entire series to, but I have already written two posts that will provide a background if you're interested: this one and that one.

I'll just give you the quick version:

The Jesuit Order was established by the mystic Ignatius of Loyola in the year 1540. He was a Catholic zealot who wanted to create a covert military arm for the Papacy. He masterminded an intense initiation program for would-be adepts, and made them swear blood-curdling oaths of secrecy and fealty. In other words, they were a secret combination bound by blood oaths, which if violated resulted in gruesome execution. 

Their purpose was to destroy all Protestant heretics (stemming from the Council of Trent) and enslave the entire world under the dictatorship of the Pope, who was just a public figurehead controlled by the Order running things behind the scenes. The man who initiates swear allegiance and obedience to is known as the Black Pope, or the Jesuit Superior General. 

The Jesuits were actually disbanded by a papal bull declared by Pope Clement XIV in 1773, which forced them to go underground in Europe and splinter off into different groups. One of the groups was led by Adam Weishaupt and established in Bavaria as the Illuminati. This wing eventually came to America and created the order of Skull and Bones in 1833; around the same time they also infiltrated American Freemasonry.

So yes, Skull and Bones is a Jesuit-created secret society, which means that somewhere way up the line from Russel Nelson is the Jesuit Superior General calling the shots. What is interesting here is that Brigham Young may have also received his marching orders from the Jesuit Order, a theory that I can't prove, but I will present you with the facts and you can decide for yourself.

Let's get back to De Smet.

In 1814, Pope Pius VII officially reinstated the Jesuits, which was perfect timing for Pierre to come to America and enter the Jesuit Novitiate in Whitemarsh, Maryland in 1821 (novitiate is another word for apprenticeship). Before we get any farther into this history, I'm going to include a snippet of the Jesuit oath so you know what kind of people we are dealing with. This is not for the faint of heart:

I do further promise and declare that I will have no opinion, or will of my own, or any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver, but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the militia of the Pope. I further promise and declare that I will make and wage relentless war, as I am directed to do to extirpate and exterminate Protestants and Liberals from the face of the whole earth. That when the same cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poison cup, the strangulation cord, the steel of the poignard, or the leaden bullet. 

I will neither spare age, sex, or condition. I will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their woman, and crush their infant's head against the wall, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race.

So now you know, when we're talking about Jesuit missionaries sent by the Pope to convert people to Catholicism, they are men who have taken this very oath. Keep that in mind as we proceed.

After spending six years in training in Missouri, De Smet made plans to begin his mission among the American Indians. But because of ill health he returned to Europe in 1833 (also the year he became a naturalized American citizen) and didn't resurface in Missouri until 1838.

He remained there until 1840, when he embarked on his crusade to proselyte to the Indians in the Rocky Mountains, specifically the Northwest. While in Europe he traveled around collecting means and funds for the Jesuit missions which were under the direction of the Superior General, Father Johannes Roothaan. It was Roothaan's aim to establish "Reductions" with the American natives that had been done in Paraguay two centuries earlier.

Under the cloak of religion, the Jesuits used the reduction program to infiltrate nations and subdue natives. In South America it was essentially a communist program (two hundred years before Marx) to solicit native labor and enrich the coffers of the Jesuits. Some have called it "social theocracy," and others "benign colonialism." 

Some have even opined that the Reduction Program was based on Plato's Republic, which is really nothing but philosophical communism. Regardless, the Reductions were just that, reductions of the rights of natives. They were treated harshly, basically enslaved, and subject to all kinds of abuses. Here is how Pope Benedict XIV described the program in 1741:

They [the Jesuits] dare before us, to enslave the Indians of Paraguay, to sell them, or buy them... separating mothers from their children, and to despoil them of their goods and property. (Quoted in Vatican Assassins, by Eric Jon Phelps, p. 296)

Bishop Juan de Palafox, writing to the Pope from Los Angeles, Mexico in 1647, described it this way:

I find almost the whole of Central America is in the hands of the Jesuits, and the property they hold in the heads of cattle and sheep is something truly enormous... and they have succeeded in a word to bring to such a height their power and riches that the secular clergy will soon be compelled to beg their bread from the Jesuits. (Quoted in Ibid, p. 296) 

De Smet's first reduction was set up among the Flathead Indians in what is now Montana. However, the reduction program was not successful in America, and De Smet ended up taking a lot of heat from Roothaan for his failures, but for three years he had traveled around what is now Idaho, Montana, and Utah, and gained an intimate knowledge of the landscape, including the Great Basin, the Bear River, and the Great Salt Lake (this will be important in a moment).

As the legend goes, De Smet became famous among Indian tribes, including Chief Sitting Bull and the Sioux, becoming affectionately known to them as "Blackrobe." They trusted him, which resulted in his being a very successful negotiator between the U.S. government and tribal leaders. But, as we all know, the promises to the natives were broken by the government, and the result was a 30-year war of Indian extermination, lasting from 1860 to 1890.

De Smet had connections with many influential political figures, including both northern and southern generals. He was an advisor to Senator Thomas Benton, President Andrew Johnson, generals Sherman and Sheridan (the butchers of the American Indians), and wait for it, an associate of general Albert Pike.

Albert Pike, for those of you who don't know, was a Scottish Rite Freemason who wrote Morals and Dogma, in which he specified that the god of Freemasonry was Lucifer. Many occult writings from people like Aleister Crowley, Madame Helena Blavatsky, and Manly P. Hall use Pike as a major reference to their craft. Morals and Dogma is also the handbook for modern Freemasonry.  

I believe De Smet was Pike's superior. Just think about the implications of that for a moment... 

Benton, Johnson, Sherman, and Sheridan were all Freemasons, just like Heber Kimball and Brigham Young were, which means they had all made oaths to the same superiors (even if they didn't know who they were). 

De Smet wore a black robe, a symbol of Saturn, the regalia of a Satanic priest or wizard. He was silently involved in some major watershed moments in America history, yet all we are told about him is how the Native Americans loved him; just a harmless priest going about teaching the gospel to the Indians. 

The worst people in the world operate under the cloak of religious piety. 

According to Eric Jon Phelps, author of Vatican Assassins, De Smet was a co-conspirator in the assassination of Lincoln with Jesuit Bernadin F. Wiget, as well as the architect of the 14th Amendment. You know, the law that made all American residents U.S. citizens, as in the U.S. corporation, not the country. 

Remember, all that maritime law nonsense originated with Rome and the Pope, whom they dubbed Pontifex Maximus (chief high priest) and Rex Mundi (king of the world). The mission of the Jesuits was to infiltrate America and hand it back to the Vatican and its priest-king.

(Check out this podcast on Albert Pike… Apparently De Smet was even involved with the establishment of the Skull and Bones… this guy had his hands in everything… start at the 1 hour 8 minute mark, but the whole podcast is good, just ignore the derogatory commentary on Joseph Smith.)

De Smet was also involved with Giuseppe Mazzini, the nationalist revolutionary who started the Italian Mafia. De Smet is the missing link connecting so many 19th century pieces of the burgeoning New World Order.  

Now, another reason De Smet was interested in befriending the Indians was to further the goals of the Jesuits with yet another scheme of controlled opposition. They used the conflict between the Indians and the whites to kill Protestant (as per their oath) immigrants. In fact they fomented this conflict. Here is what Eric Jon Phelps wrote about it:

...Pierre De Smet, one of the most powerful American Jesuits of the Nineteenth Century... the foremost Jesuit of influence among the Indian Nations... using Confederate General and 33rd Degree Freemason Albert Pike, incited his Sioux Indians to mass-murder eight hundred White Lutherans of Minnesota (Northerners) while having procured the exemption of Jesuits from the draft during America's bloodbath, erroneously called "the Civil War." (Vatican Assassins, p. 344) 

Phelps was referring to the Dakota War of 1862, read about it here. He also believes that the Mountain Meadows Massacre of 1857 was used to slaughter Protestants in the form of 120 Methodist immigrants.

Methodism is a derivative of Protestantism, originating with Jon Wesley. The Jesuits considered any breakoff group from Catholicism as a protesting movement, and therefore subject to their oath of revenge. 

The official story of the Mountain Meadows Massacre is that John D. Lee was an insane zealot who was taking revenge on these immigrants for the death of Joseph Smith. 

That doesn't add up. Joseph had been dead for 13 years, and these immigrants clearly had nothing to do with his death. That was a cover. Was Brigham acting under the direction of a Jesuit superior when he allowed this genocide to take place? 

What was really going on in Utah? (I promise I'm getting to that soon). 

You know, it's funny, growing up in the 80s and 90s, with all the best western movies at my disposal, it was ingrained into my mind that the natural state of cowboys and Indians was one of warfare. On top of that I loved reading Louis L'amour novels, but I noticed a pattern in his writing: all the bad guys were white cowboys manipulating other white cowboys. Indians had nothing to do with it. 

I now believe that the war between white immigrants and plains Indians was concocted by the Jesuits. After all, If you want to take over an entire nation the best way to do so is to foment conflict. Ah, the oldest trick in the book, order out of chaos. 

The same pattern is being repeated in Israel at this very moment, but I’m getting off track again. 

The Meeting

Alright, I've stalled long enough. Let's get on with the meeting between Brigham and De Smet (now that you have a little background on that rascal). 

This happened at Winter Quarters in the Fall of 1846. 

Over the last year I have seen a few Facebook memes about this alleged meeting between De Smet and Young, but never any sources cited. Needless to say, my curiosity was piqued, and about a month ago I finally freed up the time to dive into this rabbit hole.  

After a few weeks of searching I found my source in the most unlikely of places, A Comprehensive History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints by B.H. Roberts. I was blown away, and couldn't believe what I was reading. This had been there all along, but apparently no one ever bothered to read or talk about it.

On pages 84-85 of Volume 3, Roberts quotes an obscure book entitled, The Catholic Church In Utah, published by the Knights of Columbus in 1909. The latter is a Catholic fraternity founded in 1882 (go figure, another secret society).

After quoting the book Roberts endeavors to rebut its claims, without a shred of evidence, and quite laughably I might add. What did the authors of the book purport? 

That the entire migration of the Mormons to Utah was "probably" influenced by De Smet, that he personally directed them to the Salt Lake Valley. In Roberts' rebuttal, he claims that Brigham was already contemplating the Great Basin area when the saints were camped in Missouri. But he does this without citing a single source. 

Who are we to believe?

As usual, I'll just present the material and let you decide for yourself. I can't prove this either way, but I must say that the research has been fascinating, and when we get into the next post about what I believe Brigham found already existing in Utah, it may become apparent to you that he was indeed led there by superiors who were "in the know." 

I'll end with the quote from the book. Enjoy, and I'll see you next time.

The following excerpt is taken from a letter De Smet wrote to his nephew in March of 1851:

The Great Salt Lake, which is about 300 miles in circumference, lies in the Northern part of the Great Basin. It is rather shallow in the portions thus far explored; but it is supposed to be deep in the central parts. The water of the lake is more salty than sea-water. Three gallons of it yield a gallon of salt of the greatest purity, whiteness and fineness. On the northeast of the lake is the termination of the valley of Bear River. This valley is thirty miles long by twenty-two wide, and communicates with another valley, which is fifty miles by eight (now Cache Valley). It is in the first valley, enclosed by picturesque mountains, which has taken the name of the Valley of the Mormons, that their capital stands, called by some Great Salt Lake City, and by others Mormonville.

Here the authors inject some commentary:

That De Smet visited Salt Lake during his trip to the northwest in 1841 does not seem to have been generally known. This visit, in association with the fact that he was the first Catholic priest to enter Utah subsequent to the explorations of Fathers Escalante and Dominguez in 1776, gives this part of his journey great interest in connection with the history of the Church in our State.

Continuing with the letter:

In the Fall of 1846, as I drew near to the frontiers of the state of Missouri, I found the advance guard of the Mormons, numbering about 10,000, camped on the Territory of the Omaha, not far from old Council Bluffs. They had just been driven out for the second time from a State of the Union (Illinois had received them after their war with the people of Missouri). They had resolved to winter on the threshold of the great desert, and then to move onward into it, to put distance between themselves and their persecutors, without even knowing at the time the end of their long wanderings, nor the place where they should once more erect for themselves permanent dwellings. 

They asked me a thousand questions about the regions I had explored, and the valley which I have just described to you pleased them greatly with the account I gave them of it. Was that what determined them? I would not dare to assert it. They are there. In the last three years Utah has changed its aspect, and from a desert has become a flourishing territory, which will soon become one of the States of the Union. [Italics original]

And here is the final commentary from the authors that led to Roberts' attempted rebuttal:

To the Mormons living in a temporary camp on the edge of a desert, unable, or at least unwilling, to retrace the road leading back to the land of their persecutors, ignorant of the region which lay before them, De Smet's glowing description of the beautiful and fertile valley which lay beyond the mountains, brought the solution of their most perplexing problem, for it indicated a place wherein they could establish their homes and their religion, free from the troubles and persecutions which had so far beset them. 

His close acquaintance with Brigham Young, and his many conversations with him on the Rocky Mountain regions and on Salt Lake Valley, probably determined the choice of the Mormon prophet, and led to the decision which ultimately settled the Latter Day Saints in the fertile lands they now occupy in Utah. (The Catholic Church in Utah, pp. 269-71)

Other Books on De Smet

"Come, Blackrobe," De Smet and the Indian Tragedy, by John J. Killoren, S.J., 1994.

Father Peter John De Smet, by Robert C. Carriker, 1995.

The Salt Lake Temple III: The Utah War and an Impossible Cover-Up

 Previously: The Cornerstone Ceremony

In the recently published Covenant of Christ, or modern English version of the Book of Mormon, Nephi stated that at some point after Zion is established:

...the true history of all nations will be made known. (CoC, 2 Nephi 12:13)

Implicit within that statement is that the history we are being told now is indeed, not the "true history of all nations". If it was, then why would the Lord need to correct it in the future?

What is history anyway? Whose story is his-story? As far as we know, history consists of the words we are given that describe a particular event in the past. Those words come from books, journals, documents, newspaper articles, etc. None of us were there to witness the events, and thus, are at the mercy of others who have gone before us to learn the truth. 

But what if those words have been manipulated? What if the books, journals, articles, and documents have been white-washed? What if what we think is a personal journal is nothing but an AI generated script? The truth is, if we weren't there to see an event, we have no way of verifying that it actually transpired. 

Nephi's statement above rings true to my ears. It informs me that, now more than ever, we should question everything we hear, read, and absorb into our minds. Our intellectual vigilance should be accompanied by humility. Everything we think we understand, be it physics, music, geometry, electricity, architecture, and of course "established" history, should be taken to the Lord and scrutinized with sincerity.

The Lord's injunction to "ask", "seek", and "knock" are applicable to all categories of truth and knowledge. Without the humility to ask the Lord, we'll never be given what we could have known. After all, the plight of mortals is to believe we are wise because of our education, but to suffer as fools while perishing for the lack of spiritual and temporal knowledge. No wonder the ancient prophets called us "vain", "frail", and "foolish".

In what you're about to read, I'm asking you to question the official account known as "the Utah War". A story that we're told transpired in 1857-58, involving Brigham Young, Daniel H. Wells, Freemason President James Buchanan, Colonel Sidney Albert Johnson, Thomas L. Kane, Alfred Cummings, and even Pierre de Smet.

Most importantly for my research, a major theme of the Utah War is the covering up of the temple foundation, an ardent task that we're told only took the LDS people five weeks to accomplish. Every shop on the temple block was taken down, and thousands of tons of soil was ploughed up, transported to the site, and dumped into the temple foundation, completely entombing it. 

We're told that Brigham Young gave the order on March 25 of 1858, and by the first week of May, the entire temple block appeared as a freshly ploughed farmer's field.

Ironically, (and don't we love irony in our his-stories?) the Salt Lake temple foundation, we're told, was on the cusp of rising above ground level, but would have to wait several years before seeing the light of day.

Because we know that the foundation is actually 40 feet deep and not the alleged 16, the story we are given becomes increasingly impossible. Before we examine the so-called "Utah War", let's engage in a quick exercise in logic.

Remember, the narrators only allow six weeks to excavate the foundation, and five weeks to backfill it.       

Logistical Inquiries  

Men with shovels and oxen with wagons were the only resources the pioneers had to dig the massive foundation hole. An area covering nearly half an acre (the temple dimensions are 180 ft x 120 ft), and at a depth of 40 feet, would require more than 40,000 tons of dirt to be excavated from the site.

We're told that this was accomplished in not more than six weeks, during the winter and early spring months of 1853. 

According to calculations by Chat GPT, this is what it would’ve taken to accomplish this Herculean feat:

• A two-oxen team could haul 1-2 tons of dirt in one load
• At four trips per day (assuming the trip was short), one team of oxen could haul 4 tons of dirt per day. 
•  To finish in the allotted time frame, about 280 teams of oxen would be required, each making 4 trips per day, at 4 tons a piece.
• Each team would require at least one teamster, comprising 280 men.
• If each man on the digging crew could dig 3 cubic yards a day, then 370 excavators would be required for the job. 
• These men would require a support crew of another 100 men to supply shovels, make repairs, provide breaks, and to coordinate other logistics.

In all, we're looking at 750 men, 560 oxen, and 280 wagons, to make this project logistically feasible. Yet, according to historians, only 150 to 200 men and boys were employed on the project. And conveniently, we are not told how many oxen or wagons were used. 

We are not told which blacksmith shop was manufacturing all the shovels, pick axes, oxen yokes, and other metal parts needed for wagons. 

We are not told how these men and oxen were fed and watered.

Keep in mind that this was during the winter, and there was no open range feed for the oxen. A typical 1,600 pound oxen requires 2.5% of its body weight in feed a day, especially one that is working a 10-hour shift hauling dirt. This comes out to about 50 pounds a day, and perhaps 60 pounds for the hardest-working oxen.

This means that the pioneers would've had to harvest alfalfa the previous summer and store it for winter. In order to feed 560 oxen during the six-week excavation period, they would’ve needed to store enough hay to provide 31,000 pounds per day, totaling over 1 million pounds or over 550 tons of feed. 

Of course, there is no record of any alfalfa farming going on in Utah during this time. All farming efforts were going toward food aimed at sustaining human, not animal, life. It wasn't until the late 1850s that alfalfa farms began showing up. 

Now we come to the question of water. A typical oxen needs about 15 gallons of water a day to sustain itself. At 560 oxen, this would require about 250,000 gallons of water throughout the six-week period. The main source of water would have been City Creek, but the process is more involved than just leading the oxen down to the creek to drink throughout the day. 

A team of men employed just for watering the beasts would have been required for tasks such as: breaking ice in the creek, building water troughs, hauling water to troughs in buckets, insulating those troughs with straw, and watering the oxen on timed breaks. According to Chat GPT, this would have required about 175 men, employed full time to just water the animals. Again, this is the total number the LDS historians tell us worked on the temple foundation. 

And what kind of labor force would be required to feed the oxen? 

If oxen needed to eat twice a day, a team of men would be charged with the following tasks: loading hay onto wagons or sleds from wherever it was stored, hauling it to the job site, measuring and distributing the feed, and taking care of maintenance on the sleds/wagons. 

Again, Chat GPT says that feeding the animals alone would require 30-40 men a day, for a total of around 400 man days for the six week period. Also keep in mind that several sheds or shelters would have to be constructed to store the hay, keeping it relatively dry and free of ice, and at least 100 pitch forks would be needed for the feeding crews to keep up with the twice daily feedings. Who is constructing these sheds and making these pitchforks? Who is building and maintaining the wagons and sleds?

Alright, so taking care of the animals would’ve required more men than the total number we're told excavated the temple foundation. But what about feeding the men? What kind of work force would that require?

A typical manual laborer requires about 2,500 to 3,000 calories a day to provide enough energy for robust work, especially shoveling. There would’ve been no fresh vegetables or herbs in the winter so workers would've had to rely on meat, beans, potatoes, and grain. Chat GPT breaks this down as follows:

• Grains: 1-2 pounds per pay per man
• Meat: 1/2 pound per day per man
• Potatoes/beans: 1-2 pounds per day per man
• Bread: 1-1.5 pounds per day per man (if available)
• Dairy: 1 cup per day of milk or butter

This averages out to over 4,000 pounds a day for 750 workers, totaling over 84 tons of food for the six week period. This is just to feed the excavators and teamsters, not the animal feeding and watering crews. 

To serve this many men, 7-8 cooks are needed per meal. You also need servers, plate preparers, as well as dishwashers and cleaning crews. This would require another 40-50 workers per day, employed full time in the kitchen.

Are you beginning to get a picture of what it would really take to pull something like this off? It is just not logistically feasible in the time-frame allotted by LDS historians. 

Someone is lying to us. 

We will return to logistics when we examine what it would’ve taken to bury the temple foundation in the five week period between March 25 and the first week of May in 1858.

For now, let's get back to the Utah War.

Brigham Young: Priest, King, and... Lieutenant General?

In April of 2012, Denver Snuffer wrote a paper entitled Brigham Young's Telestial Kingdom, an analysis of Young's tenure as governor and the dynamics of "the kingdom" prior to the Utah War. The article explores an intriguing paradox: why would Brigham establish himself as a king when the Book of Mormon clearly states that this land, the land of America, would be a land of liberty and have no kings upon it?

Yet, as Denver points out, both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were appointed as "kings" in the Council of Fifty, an organization known to insiders as "The Kingdom of God". The difference is that Joseph kept his kingship confined within the limits of a spiritual kingdom, with no governing authority in the mortal realm, reminiscent of Christ telling Pilot that His "kingdom was not of this world." 

Brigham, on the other hand, like king Noah of old, took his kingship quite literally, ruling in early Utah as a theocratic dictator, governing in both church and state. Like Noah, he used public funds to build businesses and luxurious homes, using his status as "high priest" to dictate in all affairs and exercising complete control over women. The latter becoming almost like property belonging to the elites of the Church. 

Brigham made no bones about his dictatorship. By the early 1850s, he was agreeing with the Territorial judges that were accusing him of being a dictator:

I am accused by our honorable judges who have left this Territory last fall entering into the Legislative Hall and there dictating them... I do dictate and I never expect to see the day while I am Governor amongst this people that I don't do it, and I want it published abroad for it is what I believe in, and it is what you believe in... (Quoted by Denver Snuffer in Brigham Young's Telestial Kingdom, p. 6, emphasis added)

Sure, Brigham Young was a self-appointed high priest and territorial king masquerading as a governor, but did he hold an even higher rank in a more clandestine organization? Judging by some interesting (and I might add unexplainable) quotes from Brigham Young on the subject of military rankings, I believe there is far more to this story than we're being told.

In September of 1844, just a few months after Joseph Smith was killed, Illinois Governor Thomas Ford appointed Brigham Young as Lieutenant-General of the Nauvoo Legion. Here is the governor's official commission:

Know ye that Brigham Young, having been duly elected to the office of Lieutenant-General of the Nauvoo Legion of the Militia of the State of Illinois, I, Thomas Ford, Governor of said State, do commission him Lieutenant-General of the Nauvoo Legion, to take rank from the 31st day of August, 1844. He is, therefore, carefully and diligently to discharge the duties of said office by doing and performing all manner of things thereunto belonging; and I do strictly require all officers under his command to be obedient to his orders; and he is to obey such orders and directions as he shall receive from time to time, from the Commander-in-chief or his superior officer... (Tullidge, Life of Brigham Young, p. 30)

Ok, so Brigham took Joseph's place as Lieutenant-General of the Nauvoo Legion, no big deal right? Well, not so fast, Edward Tullidge, author of the book quoted above, makes quite an interesting statement following his quotation of Ford's commission to Brigham Young. Writing in the 1870s, Tullidge states that he interviewed Brigham himself, and what was said should raise our eyebrows: 

It is a singular fact that, after Washington, Joseph Smith was the first man in America who held the rank of Lieutenant-general, and that Brigham Young was the next. In reply to a comment of the author upon this fact, Brigham Young said: "I was never much of a military man. The commission has since been abrogated by the State of Illinois, but if Joseph had lived when the war [Mexican] broke out, he would have become commander-in-chief of the United States armies." (Ibid, p. 30-31, emphasis added)

This prompted me to do some digging on the ranking of a lieutenant-general. According to official history, John Adams appointed George Washington as lieutenant-general during the Quasi War with France, after Washington had already served as United States president. The ranking, we're told, went dormant another sixty years, until Ulysses S. Grant was given the commission near the end of the Civil War.

In modern times, the ranking has been downgraded and diluted, and only commands 20,000 to 45,000 army or marine soldiers. So the question is: how was Joseph Smith the next in line to command the entire armies of the United States in 1844? And why was Brigham Young given the same commission?

Even though Brigham said that the commission was abrogated, the ranking was passed to Daniel H. Wells, second counselor in the First Presidency. This was documented in the Journal of Discourses:

We have nominated Daniel H. Wells for the office of Lieutenant-General of the Nauvoo Legion, the same person who has held that position since our settlement in Utah. (JD 4: 308)

Wells was being re-elected to that commission on April 6th of 1857, but apparently had held it since 1847 when the Brighamites first arrived in Utah. Just five days prior to this "election" on April 1st, Wells had used his ranking to divide the Territory of Deseret into 13 military districts.

Now that's interesting. 

Both the number 13 and the date of April 1 have esoteric significance. 13 is the number for perfect government, consisting of the 12 constellations being governed by the sun (for example, Christ and the twelve apostles). April 1st, or April Fool's day, dates back to the 1500s when Pope Gregory XIII (the 13th) replaced the Julian Calendar with the Gregorian Calendar, changing the new year from April 1st to January 1st. 

Was this number and date, 13 and April 1st, coded language for the leaders of the LDS Church entering into a secret merger with Pope? And was this part of the deal Brigham Young made with Jesuit priest Pierre de Smet when they met at Winter Quarters in 1846?

The Jesuit order was established in 1540 by Ingatius of Loyola as a clandestine military order and secret society. The highest ranking in the order is known as the Superior-General, sometimes called the Black Pope. 

Is the ranking of Lieutenant-General a subordinate of the Jesuit Superior-General? 

Was the post-Joseph Brighamite Church just a front organization for a group of Jesuit coadjutors (in Catholicism, a coadjutor, or "co-assistor", is someone who shares an office with another person, and is next in line to inherit the office as a successor.)

It makes sense that Brigham was working with the Jesuits, but not Joseph Smith. So what was the true significance of Joseph first receiving the ranking of Lieutenant-General? I'm not sure, more research needs to be done on the subject. But this could be another case (like polygamy) of Brigham Young throwing Joseph under the bus by claiming that he (Brigham) inherited a Jesuit (although without mentioning the Jesuits) ranking from the first Mormon prophet. After all, all we have is a second-hand quote from Brigham making the claim that Joseph would have been commander-in-chief of the United States armies if he had lived to see the Mexican War. This is weak evidence to say the least. 

All Jesuits are required to take an oath before being initiated into the organization. The oath names all infidels and apostates as worthy of being not only murdered, but completely annihilated (read the oath here). The first two targets of this annihilation were Protestants and Liberals, the rebels of the 16th century Reformation.

In the Fall of 1857, just a few months after Wells created military districts in Utah, the famous Mountain Meadows Massacre took place.

On September 11th of 1857, a group of Indians and Mormons led by John D. Lee, murdered in cold blood over 100 Protestant immigrants just outside of Cedar City, Utah.

This genocide (including women and children) happened on a date we all know as 911, an occult number with dark underpinnings.  

The number 911 is blasphemy against God. God is represented by the numbers 7 and 10. 7 is symbolic of perfection, and 10 is symbolic of completion. God is both perfect and complete. The number 911, however, skips the number 10, or goes around God. It is how the Mystery Schools (Freemasons, Jesuits, and other secret societies) show numerically that they can ascend to become gods without a Savior; Satan's ultimate imitation of God's plan. 

Is it a coincidence that the Mountain Meadows Massacre took place on 911, and that those sacrificed where Protestant immigrants? 

I do not think so. 

Just four days later, on September 15th of 1857, Brigham Young declared martial law. You can read the historical document here. The most important sentence in the document reads as follows:

Martial law is hereby declared to exist in this Territory, from and after the publication of this Proclamation; and no person shall be allowed to pass or repass, into or through, or from this Territory without a permit from the proper officer.

Martial law is maritime law, and Brigham was setting a precedent for what Lincoln would do just six years later in 1863 when he introduced the Lieber Code and declared it law by executive order (see General Orders no. 100).

And notice that Lincoln, like Brigham, chose the date of September 15th to declare martial law (September 15, 1863). What an interesting coincidence. 

The Lieber Code divided the United States into military districts, and placed them all under martial law, the second article of which states the following:

Martial law does not cease during the hostile occupation, except by special proclamation, ordered by the commander-in-chief... (Read the entire document here)

The hostile occupation spoken of above was Lincoln's invasion of the Southern States, as well as his constitutional restrictions he placed on the Northern States. All of which set the precedent for the incorporation of the U.S. government in 1871 (transforming the U.S. government into a corporation, or business operating under maritime law). 

As far as we know, Brigham Young never declared by special proclamation that martial law ceased in the Utah Territory, as he was deposed by Governor Cumming before he had the chance. And no U.S. president has ever declared that martial law ceased in the United States, but instead have used it as a precedent to enact further constitutional restrictions on the American citizenry (FDR actually declared martial law again in 1933 in response to the banking crisis).

Furthermore, the military districts in Utah were seamlessly integrated into the U.S. military districts (specifically the Department of the Pacific) in 1862, as well as parts of Nevada and Idaho, just one year prior to Lincoln's executive order implementing the Lieber Code. 

Was all this a coincidence? 

I don't think so. I believe this was all part of the Jesuit plan to subordinate the United States to the Rex Mundi, superficially the Catholic Pope and ultimately the Jesuit Black Pope. This was accomplished by replacing the authentic Constitution with a corporate one. Read this article and that one for more information on the Jesuit subjugation of America. And watch this video. 

Now we come to October of 1857, when Johnston's Army began to have run-ins with the Nauvoo Legion. Well, the word legion is best not used here, because only a handful of men (between 20 and 40), operating under Captain Lot Smith, were able to burn a train of 74 supply wagons and rustle over half of the Army's cattle--without a single casualty on either side and in a single night no less.  

The Army was on the march to Fort Bridger, some 120 miles northeast of Salt Lake City. But prior to their arrival Lot and his men burned the fort to the ground, torching all the buildings and leaving only a stone wall to shield the soldiers from the bitterly cold wind.

Temperatures at Fort Bridger dropped well below zero that winter, wreaking havoc on what was left of the Army's cattle and horses. The men, already on reduced rations from Smith's wagon raids, now faced freezing to death and starvation. Colonel Johnston would have to wait for President Buchanan to send provisions, and be forced to sit patiently while Congress decided what to do about the Mormon "problem".

Does this make any sense at all? 

Why would the U.S. Army allow a few rag tag militiamen to put 2,500 soldiers out of commission for an entire winter? It makes much more sense to me that Colonel Sydney Johnston was playing a role in a deeper conspiracy, one that implemented controlled opposition for some clandestine scheme.

Did this scheme involve Freemasons and Jesuits? According to one author, it most certainly did. 

Was the Utah War a Planned Military Operation?

According to Eric Jon Phelps, author of the book Vatican Assassins, the Utah War of 1857 was a staged event, planned by Freemasons and Jesuits:

In 1857 Masonic President James Buchanan, controlled by the Jesuits since his early 1857 arsenic poisoning, began a political agitation over the governorship of Utah, igniting the bloodless "Utah War." He dispatched a military force led by Masonic Army Colonel Albert Sydney Johnston to put down Masonic Young's refusal to submit to Federal jurisdiction. In this, Young's "Deseret" only benefited. Johnston allowed Mormon raiders to "steal" 800 Army oxen. That same year Young ordered Bishop John D. Lee to lead a force composed of Mormons and Paiute Indians to murder nearly 130 "heretic" Protestant emigrants at Mountain Meadows--pursuant to Order's wicked Council of Trent and bloody Jesuit Oath. In the Spring of 1858 Masonic President Buchanan arranged for a free pardon if Mormons would submit to Federal authority. The chief negotiator between both parties was the Jesuit, Pierre-Jean De Smet! (Vatican Assassins, p. 313)

Phelps makes some wild claims here, but overall I think he may be onto something. I can't verify that Johnston was a Mason, or that Brigham Young ordered the Mountain Meadows Massacre, but if you consider the entire chain of events, along with occult dates like September 11th, there seems to be a planned method to this "random" madness.

It was on pioneer day (July 24th of 1857) that historians claim that Brigham Young first learned that the U.S. Army had begun its march towards the Utah Territory. It was the 10 year anniversary of Brigham's arrival into Salt Lake City, and a massive party was being thrown up in Big Cottonwood Canyon. Similar to the cornerstone ceremonies I wrote about my last post, the celebration was accompanied by hymns, military parades, and cannon fire by the Nauvoo Legion.

Sometime during the festivities four riders arrived in camp, men who had been on scouting missions, one of whom was Porter Rockwell. Returning from the Missouri River plains, they would report that that the federal mail contract had been taken away from Brigham Young and that a new governor and army would soon start for Utah.

Was it a coincidence that the Brighamites were having a ritualized party up in the mountains when news came of Johnston's impending army?

I'm not sure, but curiously, the same man who is claimed to have warned Brigham of the advancing army, Porter Rockwell, would eventually be assigned as military escort to the new Governor, Alfred Cumming, in the Spring of 1858. Cumming and Colonel Johnston disagreed on what to about the "Mormon problem", and ironically, Cumming would choose Mormon bodyguards to escort him to Salt Lake City even though President Buchanan had sent Johnston's army as a posse comitatus (military escort) for the new Governor.  

And though Brigham Young declared that it would take an act of God to remove him from his governorship, he was easily talked into voluntarily stepping down, we're told, by one Thomas L. Kane.

In Eric Phelps' assessment of the conspirators involved in the Utah War, he failed to mention Kane. It was in fact Kane that negotiated peace between the U.S. government and the Mormons, and not Pierre De Smet as Phelps insists. While it is true that De Smet was called to go back to Utah as a negotiator, accompanying General Harney and another 2,500 reinforcements, Brigham Young submitted to federal authority long before De Smet was to arrive. Harney was diverted to "Bleeding Kansas", and De Smet resumed his work among the Indian tribes.

Before we get into the strange connection between Thomas L. Kane and Brigham Young, a brief point must be made on the presidential pardon offered to the Mormons by James Buchanan on April 6th (another interesting date) of 1858. The most important words of which are as follows:

...I offer now a free and full pardon to all who submit themselves to the just authority of the Federal Government...

The question to ask here is: just what were the Mormons guilty of that they needed an official pardon for? 

According to official history, the pardon was for acts of treason committed by the Nauvoo Legion against the U.S Army in the Fall of 1857. But was a little wagon burning and cattle rustling all the Mormons were guilty of? And if we're being honest here, who wouldn't have the right to defend themselves against the advances of a perceived invading army?

I believe the pardon was offered for something far more sinister. 

As you may recall, just two years earlier in 1856, Brigham Young, along with other Church leaders, began a movement called the Mormon Reformation. Home "inquisitorial missionaries" (the beginnings of the Home Teaching Program) were sent out with a list of 27 questions to make sure the lay members were falling in line with the leaders, and the doctrine of blood atonement was being used to intimidate and threaten would-be apostates into submission. 

According to some sources, many people were murdered by the Church during this time; some being accused of apostacy and others while trying to flee the territory. 

The doctrine of blood atonement, according to George Hicks, created an atmosphere of "secret murder":

A spirit of secret murder stalked abroad among the people, and many of the "undesirables" lost their lives by being murdered by unknown assassins, unknown so far as the general public were concerned. (Quoted in Brigham Young's Telestial Kingdom, p. 9)

Was it just a coincidence then, that the Santa Clara ambush and the Mountain Meadows Massacre both took place in 1857, following a climate of violent rhetoric?

The following quote is an example of this rhetoric. Notice how Brigham Young took a verse from Isaiah out of context to use for his own purposes: 

The time is coming when justice will be laid to the line and righteousness to the plummet, when we shall take the old broad sword and ask, Are you for God? And if you are not heartily on the Lord's side, you will be hewn down. (JD 4:58-59)

Of course what Brigham meant is those who are not on his side would be hewn down, a classic case of using the Lord's name in vain.

In the outside world, tensions were heating up against Utah. In the 1856 Republican National Convention, the party had dubbed polygamy as slavery's evil twin. Rumors began circulating about the violence in Utah and Brigham's defiance of constitutional law. 

President James Buchanan, who had been in England during the previous four years, was elected just in time to deal with an ensuing slavery debate crisis in "Bleeding Kansas." After reading reports from postal serviceman William M.F. Magraw and Utah Territorial Judge William Drummond, Buchanan became convinced that Brigham Young had to be dealt with. Magraw reported the following:

There is no disguising the fact, that there is left no vestige of law and order, no protection for life or property; the civil laws of the Territory are overshadowed and neutralized by so-styled ecclesiastical organization, as despotic, dangerous and damnable, as has ever been known to exist in any country... (Quoted in Forty Years..., p. 170)

As much as LDS historians like to paint Magraw and Drummond as questionable characters (and they well may have been), that doesn't necessarily mean that their reports weren't accurate or sincere.

We know that Brigham Young employed multiple assassins to "use up" his enemies from time to time. One very revealing book on this subject is the confessions of one of Brigham's most able hitmen, Bill Hickman (read it here). Hickman was assigned his first victim in 1846 at Winter Quarters, an Indian warrior who was wreaking havoc among the encampment. Hickman describes each murder he committed in a systematic and matter-of-fact manner. He believed Brigham was a prophet and that it was his religious duty to "use up" those he was assigned to assassinate. 

Hickman's memoirs offer us an honest glimpse at just how despotic Brigham Young was. In fact, after Hickman turned against Brigham and refused to murder an army commander he had befriended, Brigham Young tried to have him killed. Consequently, Hickman left Utah and wrote his "confessions."

While on historical paper it appeared that the U.S. government was concerned about what was transpiring in Utah and was attempting to take action against it, the truth is that the Utah War only bolstered Brigham Young's power. Although he lost his appointment as governor, he retained all of his wealth and priestly power over the Church, and as we've seen with Catholic Popes and other religious leaders, high priests oftentimes enjoy more power than presidents, pundits, and politicians.

Furthermore, and far more dastardly, Brigham Young was absolved of all the crimes he had committed against the people of Utah (we don't even know how many Mormons were blood atoned during this period). James Buchanan, sending Johnston's Army as merely a decoy, pardoned Brigham Young and all other Mormons after several strings of murders had been committed in Utah, including the Mountain Meadows and Santa Clara massacres. 

Was this pardon, done with impeccable timing, just a mere coincidence? Or was it deliberately planned by Brigham's Jesuit puppet masters to absolve him of all crimes and allow him to continue his Jesuit assignment in Utah? 

I, for one, do not believe the official history. And we should be reminded that the Book of Mormon clearly reveals how secret combinations function; always punishing the innocent while allowing the guilty to continue in their crimes:

And seeing the people in such a state of awful wickedness, and those Gaddianton robbers filling the judgement seats, having usurped the power and authority of the land, laying aside the commandments of God and not in the least aright before him, doing no justice unto the children of men, condemning the righteous because of their righteousness, letting the guilty and the wicked go unpunished because of their money; and moreover, to be held in office at the head of government, to rule and do according to their wills, that they might get gain and glory of the world; and moreover, that they might the more easily commit adultery, and steal, and kill, and do according to their own wills-... (Helaman 3:1, RE)

Thomas L. Kane and Brigham Young: A Strange Friendship

Thomas L. Kane was the most famous non-Mormon friend of the LDS Church that you've probably never heard of. He maintained a friendship and correspondence with Brigham Young for nearly three decades. Like Pierre de Smet, he first appeared on the LDS scene at Winter Quarters in 1846. He had come as a young idealist, (so we're told), crusading for the liberties and rights of the downtrodden, and having the political clout of a son of a U.S. district court judge from Philadelphia, (Freemason John Kintzing Kane), he took the Mormons under his wing as their most avid lobbyist. 

To help the Mormons win favor with President Polk, Kane used his influence to convince the Polk Cabinet to agree to enlist 500 LDS men to serve in the Mexican-American War in what would become known as the Mormon Battalion. With the help of his father, Kane convinced the federal government to allow the Mormons to occupy Indian lands along the Missouri River near Winter Quarters. 

During 1846 and 1847, Kane regularly met with Church leaders in private meetings, many of whom were members of the Secret Chamber. 

Why would Church leaders allow a non-member "gentile" into their secret and closed group?

The short answer is because Kane was their number-one friend in Washington, helping Brigham Young facilitate his every political move, and becoming his most trusted non-Mormon advisor. 

Kane regularly wrote articles defending the Mormons, even after he learned that they were practicing polygamy. Oddly, Kane wrote that he was disgusted with polygamy and felt betrayed by Young and other Church leaders for hiding it from him, yet he still continued lobbying for the Mormons. 

In 1848, it was Kane that applied for a territorial government in Utah. In 1850, President Millard Fillmore asked Kane to become the Territory's first governor, to which Kane declined and recommended Brigham Young.

During the decade of the 1850s, Kane and Young's friendship continued apace. Kane was given money (usually in the form of gold) that came from the coffers of the Church, probably in exchange for his lobbying in Washington. 

Interestingly, both Kane and Young resented Protestant evangelicalism, blaming "Mormon woes" in the form of religious persecution on the movement. This is highly suspect of Jesuit influence, as Protestants were the Order's first anti-Catholic target. 

After the 1856 election, Young wrote a letter to Kane (who was working for his father in Philadelphia) about President-elect James Buchanan, confident the new President would be a "friend" and "not whit behind" President Fillmore.

Yet, in 1857, all hell broke loose against the Mormons, or at least that is what it looked like. In a milieu of anti-Mormon rhetoric, Buchanan would famously send a large portion of the U.S. Army to quell a "rebellion."

In January of 1858, Kane asked Buchanan if he could travel to Utah as a peace negotiator, and was granted permission. On the 5th of January he departed, taking a steam ship from New York to Panama, and finally arriving in Los Angeles. From there he traveled by carriage on the old Spanish highway (now I-15) to Salt Lake City. 

By the way, old maps made by Spanish explorers show already existing cities, with stone buildings, all along I-15 in the 1700s. See the video below to view the maps, he shows them at the 13:30 minute mark:

 

When Kane arrived at Camp Scott things were tense between Colonel Johnston and Governor Cumming. Johnson wanted the Mormons to submit to military authority, while Cumming was seeking a more civilized approach. When Kane showed up, it was almost as if all parties submitted to him. Cumming agreed to give up his military escort, provided by Johnston, and Johnston, although appearing to put up a fight, acquiesced to Kane and Cumming. 

Andrew Love Neff, author of History of Utah, describes Kane's influence on Cumming as follows:

Almost instantly Col. Kane [Kane was also a Col. in the U.S. Army] became embroiled with Col. Johnston, but interestingly enough won the complete confidence of Gov. Cumming. How much was accidental and how much the result of purposeful planning, it is impossible to say. (History of Utah, p. 488, emphasis added)

By April 6th, the Mormons had been pardoned by the President, Governor Cumming had been escorted from Camp Scott to Salt Lake City by Danite assassin Orin Porter Rockwell, and Brigham Young gave up his governorship, even though he stated it would take an act of God to remove him from the position. 

A few months later in late June, Johnston's Army rolled into Salt Lake City, finding it completely empty, as most of the inhabitants had abandoned their homes and headed to southern settlements. The temple foundation, we're told, had been covered up in only five weeks and appeared as a "freshly plowed farmer's field". After a few weeks, the Saints shuffled back into Salt Lake City, after Johnston's men had occupied Camp Floyd, only 40 miles to the south.

Just like that, everything went back to normal again: no casualties, no forced expatriation, no persecution, and no loss of Church property. In fact, the LDS people benefited economically from the presence of the army. When the army left, goods were fire sold to the Mormons for pennies on the dollar, something like $4 million worth of goods were purchased for around $100K. 

All of this was because of Thomas Kane. 

Who really was this man?

Was he a handler for Brigham Young, not unlike the role that Colonel Edward Mandell House filled for Woodrow Wilson? 

All important leaders, in both religion and government, are assigned handlers by secret societies, to ensure that they do what they're supposed to do.

Kane's younger brother Elisha Kane was a famous Arctic explorer who succumbed to poor health during the climax of the Utah War. Elisha had been an assistant surgeon in the Navy in his younger years, and in 1843 had served directly under Caleb Cushing on the USS Brandywine during the China Commercial Treaty mission.

This Kane family connection to Caleb Cushing is very important. 

Cushing was from Newburyport, MA, the same town that Albert Pike was from. Pike and Cushing were friends, both Scottish Rite Freemasons (organized in 1853) and both members of the Knights of the Golden Circle.

This latter group, the Golden Circle, was made up of wealthy New England families with ancestral roots stretching back to Venetian Royalty. They were also known as the Essex Junta, a powerful secret combination that orchestrated both the Mexican War and the U.S. Civil War. They were working with European bankers, the same bankers who assassinated Abraham Lincoln for refusing to take foreign loans to finance the Civil War.

The history of Caleb Cushing is quite a rabbit hole, and I can't get into it here. So I recommend two books that will reveal the complete story:

• Essex Junta: Newburyport and the 3 World Wars, by David S. Brody and Kimberly A. Scott. This is actually a novel that that is in the genre known as "faction", or fiction based upon fact. The authors created a fictional story based upon real historical documents, the crux of which are personal letters written by Albert Pike (Brigham Young is named in one of the letters). 
• Treason in America: From Arron Burr to Averell Harriman, by Anton Chaitkin. This book is a powerhouse of documented evidence of a massive conspiracy to destroy America from the inside, with Caleb Cushing being the major link. Chaitkin begins in Boston and reveals all the players involved in the conspiracy (even abolitionists like William Lloyd Garrison were involved; he was a friend of Cushing and also from Newburyport, MA).       

Thomas Kane continued to correspond with, and counsel Brigham Young until Young's death in 1877. Because Kane was also a lawyer, he traveled to Utah in 1877 and oversaw the execution of Young's will, ensuring Young's family fortune by keeping Church and personal property separate. This was done by keeping several Church-owned properties and businesses in Brigham Young's personal name. These properties were eventually transferred to John Taylor, and thus marked the beginning of the Trustee-n-Trust, now known as the Corporation Sole, allowing one man to control the entire financial empire.

Kane was there to assist the fledgling Church empire every step of the way. Truly, without his enduring friendship to Brigham Young, the LDS Church may not have become the financial behemoth it is today.

One important part of this story is how the Mormon people were actually treated by their own leaders during 1858. According to Andrew Love Neff, over 1/3 of the occupants of Salt Lake City did not evacuate willingly:

Two or three Mormons, who had refused to go, had been notified that the military would turn them out of their houses. "We understood that a small guard was left at each of the settlements from which families had been removed." Next comes a statement which requires considerable modification: "We were also informed that at least one-third of the persons who had removed from their homes were compelled to do so." (History of Utah, pp. 501-02, emphasis added).

Were these people "compelled" by the Danites working under Brigham Young?

An Impossible Cover-Up

Once again I consulted Chat-GPT on the feasibility of completely covering the temple foundation in only five weeks, from the end of March to the beginning of May, 1858. (Author Mark Henshaw, in his book Forty Years: The Saga of Building the Salt Lake Temple, makes the claim that the temple foundation was covered by early May of 1858, see p. 205)

Chat-GPT calculated the following numbers based on a 16 foot foundation, and even those numbers are impossible. But we know that the foundation was much deeper thanks to news articles published during the 1960s renovation and conversations with modern construction workers involved in the recent temple renovation. 

17,000 cubic yards would have been required to fill in the temple foundation at 16 feet, and nearly three times that amount would have been required to fill a foundation depth of 40 feet. 

According to Chat GPT's calculations, 17,000 cubic yards alone would have required 458 wagon loads of dirt. If they had a 100 wagons available for hauling dirt, each wagon would have to make over 130 trips from the dirt source to the temple grounds, in just over one month. There are no accounts informing us as to where the soil was sourced, or how long each wagon trip took.

In fact, there are no contemporary journals that mention filling in the foundation at all. 

The story of the foundation being "buried" didn't appear until decades later (like so many other myths in Mormonism).

But the real smoking gun that proves this story is a complete fabrication comes when you actually compare the burial time line with recorded historical events. 

For starters, there were virtually no people in Salt Lake City during the month of April 1858, simply because Brigham Young had ordered them to evacuate. A small skeleton crew of men (calculated by Chat GPT to be between 200-300 men) were left behind to torch buildings and farms if necessary when Johnston's army arrived. 

Could these 200 to 300 men, who were probably busy loading wagons for evacuating Mormons, and hauling hay and straw to vacant buildings to ready them for torching, have also taken care of the temple foundation burial? 

Remember, we're also told they tore down the different shops (blacksmith, et al) around the temple block during the same time period.

Each of those 100 wagons would've had to make 18 trips per day from the soil source to the temple grounds. That would require 200-300 men just to drive the wagons, let alone excavating the soil, loading the wagons, and dumping and spreading the dirt over the foundation. Who is feeding and watering the oxen? Who is doing maintenance on the wagons? 

As always, none of these logistical questions are answered. And when you really look at the timeline of events it becomes certain the temple foundation cover-up never actually happened:

• March 21, 1858: Brigham Young calls a special conference ordering the inhabitants of the city to evacuate. 
• March 25, 1858: Brigham Young gives the order to bury the temple foundation.
• April 8th, 1858: Governor Cummings arrives in Salt Lake City with his Danite escort, finding the city abandoned, and complaining that there is no one to govern. 
• May 8, 1858: The New York Tribune publishes an article reporting on the mass exodus of the Mormons from Salt Lake City. 
• June 17, 1858: The New York Times reports that around 40,000 Mormons have abandoned their homes in Salt Lake City.
• June 26, 1858: Johnston's Army finally arrives in an empty Salt Lake City.  

Tell me dear readers, where in this time line is there room to bury a temple foundation needing anywhere from 20,000 to 40,000 tons of dirt? 

If Governor Cumming found the city empty by April 8th, then that means that workers would've had to bury the foundation in less than two weeks. That would have been completely impossible, even for today's standards using modern excavators.

Curiously, Governor Cumming never mentions the temple foundation in his memoirs, nor does Thomas L. Kane. Neither does any other major character in the story of the Utah War, and not a single contemporary journal entry speaks a word about it.

It leaves me to conclude the entire story is nothing but myth, because, of course I believe the temple was already there, and no one mentioned it because these types of buildings were very common and existed all over the country.

More important than any story about a temple foundation, is the fact that Brigham Young and other Church leaders literally got away with murder, being pardoned by James Buchanan just a few short months after two massacres and a string of murders in Utah. 

Remember, the Book of Mormon beckons us modern Gentiles to repent of a host of sins and iniquities that began with the Utah Gentiles:

Turn, all ye gentiles, from your wicked ways, and repent of your evil doings--of your lyings and deceivings, and of your whoredoms, and of your secret abominations, and your idolatries, and of your murders, and your priestcrafts, and your envyings, and your strifes, and from all your wickedness and your abominations... (3 Nephi 14:30, RE)

Join me next time as we explore the architects involved in the Salt Lake Temple, and what LDS historians say took place on the temple grounds during the decade of the 1860s.

Part IV: An AI-Generated Script