Jeff Lindsay is a lap-dog Mormon apologist.  Every single assertion he makes in
his review is refuted by simply educating one's self on the facts.  I've
written numerous posts on ARM about the Missouri War and the inception of the
Danites.  I recommend you dig into the archives and read up on them.  I don't
have the time to re-hash it yet again, but briefly:

Lindsay's assertion (from Leland Gentry) that there was a "good" band of
Danites led by Smith, and a "bad" one led by Sampson Avard, is pure crap.
Several Mormons who were members of the band testified that it was Smith
himself who ordered the raids on Gallatin, Millport, and Grinders Fork, mere
days before they surrendered to state authorities at Far West.   Smith's letter
he wrote from Liberty Jail naming Avard as the Danite instigator, asserting
that "when we discovered what Avard was doing, he was excommunicated," is a
bald faced lie of Smith's.   In his "Orrin Porter Rockwell: Man of God, Son of
Thunder," historian Harold Schindler pointed out that Avard had acted as a
surgeon within the Danite band, and that he in fact treated Danite leader (and
apostle) David W. Patten's mortal wounds which he incurred in the skirmish at
Crooked River----and that skirmish was mere DAYS before Smith & Co. surrendered
at Far West---and Joseph Smith was at Patten's and Avard's side while Patten
lay dying.

Also, Avard was not excommunicated until March 17, 1839---FIVE MONTHS after the
Far West surrender, and AFTER the main body of Mormons had settled in Nauvoo.  

That makes it obvious that Smith invented his lie about Avard being the
Danites' founder because Smith was at the time, incarcerated in Liberty Jail
awaiting trial, and he needed someone to shift blame for the Mormon crimes
onto.  Avard wasn't excommunicated because of allegedly leading the Danites,
but because he turned states' evidence and testified against Smith & Co.  

Also, numerous other Mormons testified that it was Smith and Rigdon who
instigated the entire culture of violence against Mormon dissenters and
"Gentiles," beginning with Rigdon's "Salt Sermon" the previous June.  

LDS apologist Jeff Lindsay trusts the viewpoints of fellow LDS apologist
Gentry, when the more scholarly and reliable method is to study the actual
statements of the first-hand participants, and draw one's own conclusions based
on that.  It doesn't take much study to realize that Joseph Smith's assertions
don't hold water.  

B. H. Roberts, in his "Comprehensive History of the Church," is the man most
responsible for propagating the one-sided, Smith-friendly view of events.
Since most Mormons over the decades have trusted in Roberts' writings because
Roberts was a GA and therefore "honest," Roberts' work has become the "truth"
for most modern Mormons like Lindsay.

Le Sueur is a legitimate historian, and his book was published by a university
press, rather than by a group dedicated to the furtherment of an agenda (IOW,
the LDS Church and its apologists.)

Some time ago, I compiled a list of web sources on the subject, so here it is
again, for interested parties:

Senate Document 189 (under
construction):http://www.olivercowdery.com/smithhome/1838Sent.htm

Bishop John Corrill's "A Brief History of the
Church":http://www.olivercowdery.com/smithhome/1830s/1839Corl.htm

Benjamin Johnson's "My Life's
Review":http://www.math.byu.edu/~smithw/Lds/LDS/Early-Saints/BFJohnson.html

The "Reed Peck Manuscript":http://www.connect-a.net/users/drshades/reedpeck.htm

Ebenezer Robinson's "The
Return":http://www.kingdomofzion.org/doctrines/library/journals/Robinson,E
benezer.txt

David Whitmer's "Address To All Believers in
Christ":http://www.helpingmormons.org/address.htm

David Whitmer's 1887 letter to Joseph Smith
lll:http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/dw_let1.htm

John Whitmer's "History of the
Church":http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/jw_hist.htm

To repeat: Rather than trusting in the slanted apologetics of the Jeff Lindsays
of the world, simply read the accounts from the actual participants, and draw
your own conclusions.

Randy J.