Jefferson, who fought against the likes of islamophobic xian puke David Barton and WND, would be appalled by the title and use of the word islam instead of pirate.
*The Jefferson Lies* withdrawn from publication[edit <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Barton_(author)&action=edit§ion=8&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro> ] In 2012, Barton's *New York Times* bestseller[62] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Barton_(author)#cite_note-62> *The Jefferson Lies: Exposing the Myths You've Always Believed About Thomas Jefferson* (published April 10, 2012)[63] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Barton_(author)#cite_note-63> was voted "the least credible history book in print" by the users of the History News Network <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_News_Network> website. [22] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Barton_(author)#cite_note-Schuessler-22> A group of 10 conservative Christian professors reviewed the work and reported negatively on its claims, saying that Barton has misstated facts about Jefferson.[58] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Barton_(author)#cite_note-Kidd2012-58> [64] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Barton_(author)#cite_note-64> On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 3:28:20 PM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote: > > > THOMAS JEFFERSON CRUSHED MUSLIM TERRORISTSHistorian: 3rd president offers > lessons for confronting militant IslamPublished: 01/11/2016 at 8:40 PM > > http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/tough-guy-thomas-jefferson-crushed-muslim-terrorists/#RHVxcHEl2gkWiKrC.99 > > <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wnd.com%2F2016%2F01%2Ftough-guy-thomas-jefferson-crushed-muslim-terrorists%2F%23RHVxcHEl2gkWiKrC.99&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGIKsYXsTwJjRMvKp6ACC4HDE3-iQ> > > While Muslim terrorists kidnapped and killed innocent people around the > world as they do today, Thomas Jefferson knew exactly how to end radical > Islam’s bloodshed – with a classic American take-no-prisoners smackdown. > > President Jefferson refused to play games when given the choice of > appeasement or confrontation in the face of terror. > > Historian David Barton told WND Jefferson led America’s first war against > radical Islam. And the author of the newly released expanded edition of the > bestselling book, “The Jefferson Lies” > <http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/shocking-truth-about-jefferson-4-95-today-only/> > sees > many parallels between the young republic’s struggle against the Barbary > Pirates and the West’s current war against Muslim terrorists. > > “The one thing Thomas Jefferson showed throughout his life is that he was > diligent about and intolerant of violations of individual rights,” Barton > said. “Jefferson was very clear that our people and property were entitled > to protection wherever they go. And he was just as diligent to protect > American rights in Europe and on the high seas as he was within America.” > > *“The Jefferson Lies” tackles seven myths about Thomas Jefferson head-on. > Get the blockbuster book so politically incorrect, the original publisher > pulled it from shelves!* > <http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/shocking-truth-about-jefferson-4-95-today-only/> > > During the period of the American Revolution and the early republic, > American merchants and sailors were under constant threat from North > African pirates from the Muslim powers known as the Barbary States. More > than one million Europeans were captured and enslaved by Muslim raiders > between the 16th and 18th centuries. One village in Ireland, Baltimore, > was famously sacked and entirely depopulated by slavers. > > image: > http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/01/Thomas-Jefferson-portrait-243x300.jpg > [image: Thomas-Jefferson-portrait] > > Thomas Jefferson > > Jefferson was well acquainted with this history. In Jefferson’s initial > draft of the Declaration of Independence, he criticized the “Christian king > of Great Britain” for engaging in slavery, which he termed “this piratical > warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers.” As the late Christopher > Hitchens observed, > <http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_2_urbanities-thomas_jefferson.html> “The > allusion to Barbary practice seem[s] inescapable.” > > But Jefferson also had firsthand experience with the motivations of > Islamic slavers. While in London, Jefferson and John Adams spoke to the > ambassador from Tripoli, Abd Al-Rahman, and questioned him on why the > Barbary pirates thought they should war upon a nation that had never done > them any harm. > > The Muslim ambassador’s response was, > <http://www.wnd.com/2015/02/u-s-at-war-with-islam-since-thomas-jeffersons-time/> > “It > was … written in their Quran, that all nations who should not have > acknowledged Islam’s authority were sinners, that it was their … duty to > make war upon them … and to make slaves of all they could take as > prisoners.” > > Barton argues it was this shocking response that drove both Adams and > Jefferson to seek out their own copies of the Islamic holy book. > > “They both individually wanted to know,” Barton said. “They were not > placated by platitudes from one side or the other. They wanted to see for > themselves. For them, it was a self-evident fact that when you read the > Quran, you’ll see why they behave the way they do.” > > However, Adams and Jefferson had a fundamental disagreement about how to > respond to this problem of Islamic terrorism. > > “John Adams, as president, refused to use the navy to fight the pirates > because he knew if we got involved in a conflict with radical Islam, it > would be on going for years,” Barton said. “He thought the American people > had no stomach for it.” > > image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/01/barbary-pirate-painting.jpg > [image: "A Barbary Pirate" by Pier Francesco Mola, 1650] > > “A Barbary Pirate” by Pier Francesco Mola, 1650 > > In contrast, Barton said Jefferson’s long experience of dealing with the > Barbary pirates as secretary of state under George Washington and as vice > president under Adams led him to a different approach. > > “Jefferson’s attitude is that he would put an end to this kind of > terrorism because had seen the country dealing with it for many years,” > Barton explained. “He had seen Americans dealing with it for 15 years.” > > While Adams thought America simply could not afford a war, Jefferson > demanded the United States cease paying the tribute demanded by the Barbary > States. > > *“The Jefferson Lies” tackles seven myths about Thomas Jefferson head-on. > Get the blockbuster book so politically incorrect, the original publisher > pulled it from shelves!* > <http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/shocking-truth-about-jefferson-4-95-today-only/> > > When Jefferson became president in 1801, the ruler of Tripoli demanded > tribute, which Jefferson refused. The result was the First Barbary War. > > American forces suffered a setback when the U.S.S. Philadelphia ran > aground and the crew was captured. However, Stephen Decatur became an > American hero when he led an effort to burn the ship so the Mussulmen, as > they were then called, couldn’t use it. > > Eventually, American forces were able to capture territory in the area and > force a peace treaty, which freed the captured crew. The victories of these > early American armed forces are immortalized by a stanza of the “Marines’ > Hymn” which refers to the “shores of Tripoli.” > > However, as Barton noted, this conflict did not end the threat to the > United States. Within only a few years of the treaty ending the war, the > Barbary pirates were once again raiding American ships. It would ultimately > fall to a different American president, Jefferson fellow Virginian James > Madison, to preside over a Second Barbary War that would ultimately end the > American payments to the Islamic corsairs of North Africa. > > Barton said Adams was right about the expense and time required to > confront Islamic piracy. However, ultimately the problem was stopped when > the United States was able to inflict a high enough cost to force > aggressive Muslims to back down. If the United States had followed the > European practice of simply paying off the Islamic attackers, the problem > could have continued indefinitely. > > Today, Barton sees a similar pattern at work, especially when it comes to > the aggressive behavior of Muslim migrants > <http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/world-refuses-to-blame-islam-for-rapes-violent-attacks/> > in > Europe. Barton points to the mass sexual assault of German women by Muslim > men in the shadow of the Cologne Cathedral as part of a Muslim penchant for > desecration. > > “I’ve been to Israel a number of times, and one thing I’ve noticed is that > every time there is a biblical site, the Muslims have to mark it in some > way,” Barton said. “Whether it is to put a mosque there or desecrate it in > some way, it has been their nature to act like a dog marking territory. > They’ve done it with Buddhist symbols. They’ve done it with Hindu symbols, > and they are particularly eager to do it with Christian or Jewish symbols. > On the holiest of holies, they’ve built a mosque. This is just part of the > desecration of what they do.” > > Barton argues this aggressive behavior needs to be confronted. > > “They take places that are holy to everyone else and work very hard to > create outrage and desecration on those sites,” he said. “The thinking that > says that is a good thing to do is something that should never be welcomed > in the world, for any religion.” > > image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/01/Barbary-pirates-painting2.jpg > [image: The burning of the Philadelphia in Tripoli Harbor, an act that > caused the American offensive against the Barbary Pirates. (Painting from > the Mariners’ Museum collection)] > > The burning of the Philadelphia in Tripoli Harbor, an act that caused the > American offensive against the Barbary Pirates. (Painting from the > Mariners’ Museum collection) > > Barton said contemporary Europeans could learn a lesson from Thomas > Jefferson. He equates current Western appeasement with efforts by Europeans > of the 18th century to pay off the Barbary pirates instead of confronting > them. > > “The willingness to bend over backward and placate the enemy in the hopes > they will bring peace is exactly what drove Europe in dealing with the > Barbary pirates,” charged Barton. > > Barton said efforts by German authorities > <http://www.wnd.com/2015/12/germany-covering-up-crimes-committed-by-migrants/> > to > conceal crimes committed by Muslims is appeasement. He also believes there > are similar efforts throughout Europe as well as the growth of “no-go > zones,” > <http://www.wnd.com/2015/01/islam-experts-no-go-zones-looming-for-america/>where > > Islamic radicals hold sway. > > “Across Europe, you find the desire to placate rather than confront,” > Barton stated. “You find the desire to limit our own rights rather than > secure our rights. And this is exactly what was happening in Europe 200 > years ago. This is just the modern version, the round two, of what we saw > in Jefferson’s first ‘War on Terrorism.'” > > Barton believes there are potential political and military leaders ready > to take up Jefferson’s challenge of confronting terrorism rather than > placating it. He also thinks the United States has the capability to > destroy Islamic radicalism. > > Barton observed: “The willingness to use force and inflict casualties is > the kind of attitude it will take to answer this challenge because > historically, that’s the kind of attitude that will make the Muslims say, > ‘The price for us is too high to pay. We’ll back off and leave you guys > alone.’ Unfortunately, even if we do that, Muslims may not necessarily > leave the others guys alone.” > > However, as in Jefferson’s day, the real question is whether the United > States has the moral and economic strength to confront Islamic radicalism. > As John Adams argued so many years ago, it’s an open question whether the > United States has the stomach for a long conflict. > > Barton said in its essence, the problem is the same as that which faced > Jefferson. > > “It’s a question of will,” he said. > > * “The Jefferson Lies” tackles seven myths about Thomas Jefferson head-on. > Get the blockbuster book so politically incorrect, the original publisher > pulled it from shelves!* > <http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/shocking-truth-about-jefferson-4-95-today-only/> > > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 4:00 PM, plainolamerican <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Don't confuse Jefferson's war with pirates with a war on islam. >> Thomas Jefferson explained that the Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom >> that he wrote was designed to protect all faiths — and I'm quoting Thomas >> Jefferson now — 'the Jew and the gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan.'" >> . The rancorous public dispute concerning the inclusion of Muslims, for >> which principle Jefferson’s political foes would vilify him to the end of >> his life, thus became decisive in the Founders’ ultimate judgment not to >> establish a Protestant nation. >> >> Excerpted from "Thomas Jefferson's Qur'an" >> <http://www.amazon.com/dp/0307268225/?tag=saloncom08-20> >> >> At a time when most Americans were uninformed, misinformed, or simply >> afraid of Islam, Thomas Jefferson imagined Muslims as future citizens of >> his new nation. His engagement with the faith began with the purchase of a >> Qur’an eleven years before he wrote the Declaration of Independence. >> Jefferson’s Qur’an survives still in the Library of Congress, serving as a >> symbol of his and early America’s complex relationship with Islam and its >> adherents. That relationship remains of signal importance to this day. >> >> That he owned a Qur’an reveals Jefferson’s interest in the Islamic >> religion, but it does not explain his support for the rights of Muslims. >> Jefferson first read about Muslim “civil rights” in the work of one of his >> intellectual heroes: the seventeenth-century English philosopher John >> Locke. Locke had advocated the toleration of Muslims—and Jews—following in >> the footsteps of a few others in Europe who had considered the matter for >> more than a century before him. Jefferson’s ideas about Muslim rights must >> be understood within this older context, a complex set of transatlantic >> ideas that would continue to evolve most markedly from the sixteenth >> through the nineteenth centuries. >> >> Amid the interdenominational Christian violence in Europe, some >> Christians, beginning in the sixteenth century, chose Muslims as the test >> case for the demarcation of the theoretical boundaries of their toleration >> for all believers. Because of these European precedents, Muslims also >> became a part of American debates about religion and the limits of >> citizenship. As they set about creating a new government in the United >> States, the American Founders, Protestants all, frequently referred to the >> adherents of Islam as they contemplated the proper scope of religious >> freedom and individual rights among the nation’s present and potential >> inhabitants. The founding generation debated whether the United States >> should be exclusively Protestant or a religiously plural polity. And if the >> latter, whether political equality—the full rights of citizenship, >> including access to the highest office—should extend to non-Protestants. >> The mention, then, of Muslims as potential citizens of the United States >> forced the Protestant majority to imagine the parameters of their new >> society beyond toleration. It obliged them to interrogate the nature of >> religious freedom: the issue of a “religious test” in the Constitution, >> like the ones that would exist at the state level into the nineteenth >> century; the question of “an establishment of religion,” potentially of >> Protestant Christianity; and the meaning and extent of a separation of >> religion from government. >> >> Resistance to the idea of Muslim citizenship was predictable in the >> eighteenth century. Americans had inherited from Europe almost a millennium >> of negative distortions of the faith’s theological and political character. >> Given the dominance and popularity of these anti-Islamic representations, >> it was startling that a few notable Americans not only refused to exclude >> Muslims, but even imagined a day when they would be citizens of the United >> States, with full and equal rights. This surprising, uniquely American >> egalitarian defense of Muslim rights was the logical extension of European >> precedents already mentioned. Still, on both sides of the Atlantic, such >> ideas were marginal at best. How, then, did the idea of the Muslim as a >> citizen with rights survive despite powerful opposition from the outset? >> And what is the fate of that ideal in the twenty-first century? >> >> This book provides a new history of the founding era, one that explains >> how and why Thomas Jefferson and a handful of others adopted and then moved >> beyond European ideas about the toleration of Muslims. It should be said at >> the outset that these exceptional men were not motivated by any inherent >> appreciation for Islam as a religion. Muslims, for most American >> Protestants, remained beyond the outer limit of those possessing acceptable >> beliefs, but they nevertheless became emblems of two competing conceptions >> of the nation’s identity: one essentially preserving the Protestant status >> quo, and the other fully realizing the pluralism implied in the >> Revolutionary rhetoric of inalienable and universal rights. Thus while some >> fought to exclude a group whose inclusion they feared would ultimately >> portend the undoing of the nation’s Protestant character, a pivotal >> minority, also Protestant, perceiving the ultimate benefit and justice of a >> religiously plural America, set about defending the rights of future Muslim >> citizens. >> >> They did so, however, not for the sake of actual Muslims, because none >> were known at the time to live in America. Instead, Jefferson and others >> defended Muslim rights for the sake of “imagined Muslims,” the promotion of >> whose theoretical citizenship would prove the true universality of American >> rights. Indeed, this defense of imagined Muslims would also create >> political room to consider the rights of other despised minorities whose >> numbers in America, though small, were quite real, namely Jews and >> Catholics. Although it was Muslims who embodied the ideal of inclusion, >> Jews and Catholics were often linked to them in early American debates, as >> Jefferson and others fought for the rights of all non-Protestants. >> >> In 1783, the year of the nation’s official independence from Great >> Britain, George Washington wrote to recent Irish Catholic immigrants in New >> York City. The American Catholic minority of roughly twenty-five thousand >> then had few legal protections in any state and, because of their faith, no >> right to hold political office in New York. Washington insisted that “the >> bosom of America” was “open to receive . . . the oppressed and the >> persecuted of all Nations and Religions; whom we shall welcome to a >> participation of all our rights and privileges.” He would also write >> similar missives to Jewish communities, whose total population numbered >> only about two thousand at this time. >> >> One year later, in 1784, Washington theoretically enfolded Muslims into >> his private world at Mount Vernon. In a letter to a friend seeking a >> carpenter and bricklayer to help at his Virginia home, he explained that >> the workers’ beliefs—or lack thereof—mattered not at all: “If they are good >> workmen, they may be of Asia, Africa, or Europe. They may be Mahometans >> [Muslims], Jews or Christian of an[y] Sect, or they may be Atheists.” >> Clearly, Muslims were part of Washington’s understanding of religious >> pluralism—at least in theory. But he would not have actually expected any >> Muslim applicants. >> >> Although we have since learned that there were in fact Muslims resident >> in eighteenth-century America, this book demonstrates that the Founders and >> their generational peers never knew it. Thus their Muslim constituency >> remained an imagined, future one. But the fact that both Washington and >> Jefferson attached to it such symbolic significance is not accidental. Both >> men were heir to the same pair of opposing European traditions. >> >> The first, which predominated, depicted Islam as the antithesis of the >> “true faith” of Protestant Christianity, as well as the source of >> tyrannical governments abroad. To tolerate Muslims—to accept them as part >> of a majority Protestant Christian society—was to welcome people who >> professed a faith most eighteenth-century Europeans and Americans believed >> false, foreign, and threatening. Catholics would be similarly characterized >> in American Protestant founding discourse. Indeed, their faith, like Islam, >> would be deemed a source of tyranny and thus antithetical to American ideas >> of liberty. >> >> In order to counter such fears, Jefferson and other supporters of >> non-Protestant citizenship drew upon a second, less popular but crucial >> stream of European thought, one that posited the toleration of Muslims as >> well as Jews and Catholics. Those few Europeans, both Catholic and >> Protestant, who first espoused such ideas in the sixteenth century often >> died for them. In the seventeenth century, those who advocated universal >> religious toleration frequently suffered death or imprisonment, banishment >> or exile, the elites and common folk alike. The ranks of these so-called >> heretics in Europe included Catholic and Protestant peasants, Protestant >> scholars of religion and political theory, and fervid Protestant >> dissenters, such as the first English Baptists—but no people of political >> power or prominence. Despite not being organized, this minority >> consistently opposed their coreligionists by defending theoretical Muslims >> from persecution in Christian-majority states. >> >> As a member of the eighteenth-century Anglican establishment and a >> prominent political leader in Virginia, Jefferson represented a different >> sort of proponent for ideas that had long been the hallmark of dissident >> victims of persecution and exile. Because of his elite status, his own >> endorsement of Muslim citizenship demanded serious consideration in >> Virginia—and the new nation. Together with a handful of like-minded >> American Protestants, he advanced a new, previously unthinkable national >> blueprint. Thus did ideas long on the fringe of European thought flow into >> the mainstream of American political discourse at its inception. >> >> Not that these ideas found universal welcome. Even a man of Jefferson’s >> national reputation would be attacked by his political opponents for his >> insistence that the rights of all believers should be protected from >> government interference and persecution. But he drew support from a broad >> range of constituencies, including Anglicans (or Episcopalians), as well as >> dissenting Presbyterians and Baptists, who suffered persecution perpetrated >> by fellow Protestants. No denomination had a unanimously positive view of >> non-Protestants as full American citizens, yet support for Muslim rights >> was expressed by some members of each. >> >> What the supporters of Muslim rights were proposing was extraordinary >> even at a purely theoretical level in the eighteenth century. American >> citizenship—which had embraced only free, white, male Protestants—was in >> effect to be abstracted from religion. Race and gender would continue as >> barriers, but not so faith. Legislation in Virginia would be just the >> beginning, the First Amendment far from the end of the story; in fact, >> Jefferson, Washington, and James Madison would work toward this ideal of >> separation throughout their entire political lives, ultimately leaving it >> to others to carry on and finish the job. This book documents, for the >> first time, how Jefferson and others, despite their negative, often >> incorrect understandings of Islam, pursued that ideal by advocating the >> rights of Muslims and all non-Protestants. >> >> >> On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-5, Travis wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *Muslims: Nothing has changed in 200 years* >>> >>> >>> >>> A different type of president then. When Jefferson saw there was no >>> negotiating with Muslims, he formed what is the now the Marines (sea going >>> soldiers). These Marines were attached to U. S. Merchant vessels. When the >>> Muslims attacked U.S. merchant vessels they were repulsed by armed >>> soldiers, but there is more. The Marines followed the Muslims back to their >>> villages and killed every man, woman, and child in the village. It didn't >>> take long for the Muslims to leave U.S. Merchant vessels alone. English and >>> French merchant vessels started running up our flag when entering the >>> Mediterranean to secure safe travel. >>> >>> >>> >>> Why the Marine Hymn Contains the Verse "To the Shores of Tripoli" >>> >>> >>> >>> This is very interesting and a must read piece of our history. It points >>> out where we may be heading. >>> >>> Most Americans are unaware of the fact that over two hundred years ago >>> the United States had declared war on Islam and Thomas Jefferson led the >>> charge! >>> >>> >>> >>> At the height of the 18th century, Muslim pirates (the “Barbary >>> Pirates”) were the terror of the Mediterranean and a large area of the >>> North Atlantic. >>> >>> >>> >>> They attacked every ship in sight, and held the crews for exorbitant >>> ransoms. Those taken hostage were subjected to barbaric treatment and wrote >>> heart-breaking letters home, begging their government and family members to >>> pay whatever their Mohammedan captors demanded. >>> >>> These extortionists of the high seas represented the North African >>> Islamic nations of Tripoli, Tunis, Morocco, and Algiers - collectively >>> referred to as the Barbary Coast - and presented a dangerous and unprovoked >>> threat to the new American Republic. >>> >>> >>> >>> Before the Revolutionary War, U.S. merchant ships had been under the >>> protection of Great Britain. When the U.S. declared its independence and >>> entered into war, the ships of the United States were protected by France. >>> However, once the war was won, America had to protect its own fleets. >>> >>> Thus, the birth of the U.S. Navy. Beginning in 1784, 17 years before he >>> would become president, Thomas Jefferson became America's Minister to >>> France. That same year, the U.S. Congress sought to appease its Muslim >>> adversaries by following in the footsteps of European nations who paid >>> bribes to the Barbary States rather than engaging them in war. >>> >>> >>> >>> In July of 1785, Algerian pirates captured American ships, and the Dye >>> of Algiers demanded an unheard-of ransom of $60,000. It was a plain and >>> simple case of extortion, and Thomas Jefferson was vehemently opposed to >>> any further payments. Instead, he proposed to Congress the formation of a >>> coalition of allied nations who together could force the Islamic states >>> into peace. A disinterested Congress decided to pay the ransom. >>> >>> >>> >>> In 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams met with Tripoli's ambassador >>> to Great Britain to ask by what right his nation attacked American ships >>> and enslaved American citizens, and why Muslims held so much hostility >>> towards America, a nation with which they had no previous contacts. >>> >>> The two future presidents reported that Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdul >>> Rahman Adja had answered that *Islam "was founded on the Laws of their >>> Prophet, that it was written in their Quran that all nations who would not >>> acknowledge their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty >>> to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of >>> all they could take as prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who >>> should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise."* >>> >>> Despite this stunning admission of premeditated violence on non-Muslim >>> nations, as well as the objections of many notable American leaders, >>> including George Washington, who warned that caving in was both wrong and >>> would only further embolden the enemy, for the following fifteen years the >>> American government paid the Muslims millions of dollars for the safe >>> passage of American ships or the return of American hostages. The payments >>> in ransom and tribute amounted to over 20 percent of the United States >>> government annual revenues in 1800. >>> >>> >>> >>> Jefferson was disgusted. Shortly after his being sworn in as the third >>> President of the United States in 1801, the Pasha of Tripoli sent him a >>> note demanding the immediate payment of $225,000 plus $25,000 a year for >>> every year forthcoming. That changed everything. >>> >>> >>> >>> Jefferson let the Pasha know, in no uncertain terms, what he could do >>> with his demand. The Pasha responded by cutting down the flagpole at the >>> American consulate and declared war on the United States. Tunis, Morocco, >>> and Algiers immediately followed suit. Jefferson, until now, had been >>> against America raising a naval force for anything beyond coastal defense, >>> but, having watched his nation be cowed by Islamic thuggery for long >>> enough, decided that it was finally time to meet force with force. >>> >>> He dispatched a squadron of frigates to the Mediterranean and taught the >>> Muslim nations of the Barbary Coast a lesson he hoped they would never >>> forget. Congress authorized Jefferson to empower U.S. ships to seize all >>> vessels and goods of the Pasha of Tripoli and to "cause to be done all >>> other acts of precaution or hostility as the state of war would justify". >>> >>> >>> >>> When Algiers and Tunis, who were both accustomed to American cowardice >>> and acquiescence, saw the newly independent United States had both the will >>> and the right to strike back, they quickly abandoned their allegiance to >>> Tripoli. The war with Tripoli lasted for four more years, and raged up >>> again in 1815. The bravery of the U.S. Marine Corps in these wars led to >>> the line *"to the shores of Tripoli" in the Marine Hymn,* and they >>> would forever be known as "leathernecks" for the leather collars of their >>> uniforms, designed to prevent their heads from being cut off by the Muslim >>> scimitars when boarding enemy ships. >>> >>> >>> >>> Islam, and what its Barbary followers justified doing in the name of >>> their prophet and their god, disturbed Jefferson quite deeply. >>> >>> >>> >>> America had a tradition of religious tolerance. In fact Jefferson, >>> himself, had co-authored the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, but >>> fundamentalist Islam was like no other religion the world had ever seen. A >>> religion based on supremacy, whose holy book not only condoned but mandated >>> violence against unbelievers, was unacceptable to him. His greatest fear >>> was that someday this brand of Islam would return and pose an even greater >>> threat to the United States. >>> >>> >>> >>> This should concern every American. That Muslims have brought about >>> women-only classes and swimming times at taxpayer-funded universities and >>> public pools; that Christians, Jews, and Hindus have been banned from >>> serving on juries where Muslim defendants are being judged; Piggy banks and >>> Porky Pig tissue dispensers have been banned from workplaces because they >>> offend Islamist sensibilities; ice cream has been discontinued at certain >>> Burger King locations because the picture on the wrapper looks similar to >>> the Arabic script for Allah; public schools are pulling pork from their >>> menus; on and on and on and on…. >>> >>> >>> >>> *It's death by a thousand cuts,* or inch-by-inch as some refer to it, >>> and most Americans have no idea that this battle is being waged every day >>> across America. By not fighting back, by allowing groups to obfuscate what >>> is really happening, and not insisting that the Islamists adapt to our own >>> culture, the United States is cutting its own throat with a politically >>> correct knife, and helping to further the Islamists agenda. Sadly, it >>> appears that today America's STUPID leaders would rather be politically >>> correct than victorious! >>> >>> >>> __._,_.___ >>> ------------------------------ >>> Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected]> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> Visit Your Group >>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmZG42OW0xBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NjQ4OTE5MzQ-> >>> >>> >>> >>> [image: Yahoo! Groups] >>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlNnVvZmNmBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ2NDg5MTkzNA--> >>> >>> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> >>> • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use >>> <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> >>> >>> __,_._,___ >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "PoliticalForum" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
