According to the recently released 2014 World Watch List, which ranks the 50 nations where Christians are most persecuted, Syria is the third worst nation in the world in which to be Christian, Iraq is fourth, Afghanistan fifth, and Libya 13th. All four countries receive the strongest designation, “extreme persecution” (other designations are “severe,” “moderate,” and “sparse” persecution).
Aside from being so closely and harshly ranked, these four nations have something else in common: heavy U.S. involvement. Three-Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya-were “liberated” thanks to U.S. forces, while in the fourth, Syria, the U.S. is actively sponsoring “freedom fighters” against the regime, many of whom would be better labeled “terrorists.”
The Syrian situation alone indicts U.S. foreign policy. According to Reuters:
“Open Doors, a non-denominational group supporting persecuted Christians worldwide, said on Wednesday it had documented 2,123 “martyr” killings, compared with 1,201 in 2012. There were 1,213 such deaths in Syria alone last year, it said. “This is a very minimal count based on what has been reported in the media and we can confirm,” said Frans Veerman, head of research for Open Doors. Estimates by other Christian groups put the annual figure as high as 8,000.”
To stand by silently while we look at the face of evil in full display before our very eyes is the very essence of condoning the evil being perpetuated.
If ever there was a time for decent people to stand up and be heard, this is it. We are assaulted on every front with compromise, corruption, and cowardice. Those we elected to represent us are not doing so, but rather working their own agendas at our expense.
We each in our own private agony seek a way to turn our nation back to her Foundation. But what can one man or one woman do against the blind hordes?
Why do American families feel the need to put their Seniors away in “care” facilities?
Why do African-Americans try to emulate the gangster culture, then wonder why the neighborhood crime rate goes up?
Why do young girls, pre-teen girls (and boys), feel the desperate need for a boyfriend, to be “sexually attractive” and sexually active and we say, ok?
Why do we look the other way for marital infidelity, pedophilia, drug or alcohol abuse, even shoplifting?
WHO ARE WE? We used to understand that kindness, integrity, honor were good things. Now, we look the other way. We lock ourselves behind the walls of our little (mortgaged?) castle and think we’re immune. We even know the famous quote about evil being the result of what happens when “GOOD” people do nothing. Have we connected the dots yet? We’ve done NOTHING for decades and evil, perversion, corruption, degradation … moral decay has swept across this land.
So … who are we? Who do we want our CHILDREN to be?
I have listed a number of articles below, each spotlighting an error, a bungle, a wrong turn. I know it sometimes seems hopeless, but I honestly believe we are making headway one American at a time. I also believe we can only lead the way if we know where we’re going. It’s one thing to tear apart the policies of the President. It’s another thing to know where we need to go. One answer: the CONSTITUTION!
It’s time we reach out and CARE for one another again. Fear has gotten us no where! It’s time to care about our Seniors and the riches of wisdom and experience they can share with us. It’s time to care about the children who spend their days in daycare or poor schools and what they’re learning. It’s time to care about the growing corruption in Washington DC, and take a stand for who we want to be 10 years from now. It’s time to get beyond Democrat or Republican and embrace one another as AMERICANS! It’s TIME to stop pointing fingers and start using our hands to help build the America we want to pass on to our children and grandchildren … One American at a time! IT’S TIME!!!
The fact that we use and accept both the words and the concepts behind “political correctness,” demonstrates our lack of social awareness or lack of courage, one or the other!
AN attitude, word, or behavior is either Right or Wrong based on its merits, not its fashion-ability. This is just one more way that the government manipulates the population to change according to a particular social or political agenda – by declaring acceptable and unacceptable thoughts, behaviors, and ideas. This is not a NEW thing! Historical tyrants of the past instituted their own key words, ideas, and behaviors based of their goals or vision. Hitler introduced the idea of blaming the Jews for the financial difficulties of Germany in the early 1930’s culminating in the ruthless murder of 6 million Jewish people. “Stalin sent millions of people to their deaths, forced defendants at the show trials during his long rule to confess to crimes he himself had committed and inundated Soviet archives with forged and doctored documents.”
How effective is PC as a MOB RULE/THUG tool? Think for minute. Since President Obama was first elected,
he has done a flip-flop on “Gay marriage,” confusing his own party, and creating yet another rift in the American population by pitting gays (and their liberal acceptors) against the mainstream public who either do not care about the conflict or do not grasp its hidden agenda of control.
he has fed the flame of racism 100 times over, calling all good Blacks to support him and telling all Blacks who do not support him they betray they own people. Sorry, but we are ONE PEOPLE – ONE AMERICA!!!! He is the Divider-in-Chief!
he paid SEIU members to orchestrate “OCCUPY Wall St” as a tool to create chaos and further division, blaming “greedy” wealthy bankers for their lack. Ironically, while these protesters blamed the bankers for their greed, they were apparently completely blind to their own greed as they coveted what the bankers had worked for but, of course, the occupiers weren’t willing to work for the same wealth.
he has elevated devotees of Islam , whose very definition calls for either conversion or death of the infidel, to the prominent positions in the DOJ, DHS, and CIA. There are known operators high up in all of our security departments and intelligence operations. He has surrounded himself with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, further evidenced more recently by his “Sequester gift” of F-16 fighters to Egypt’s MB government. While he makes uber allowances for adherents of Islam to practice their “religion,” the door to followers of Jesus Christ to worship as they wish are closing in rapid number(re: headline photo).
We-the-people are INDIVIDUALS, and as such, we have the propensity for good and evil, and beneficial or harmful attitudes, beliefs, behaviors. The FREE PRESS enabled by our Constitution is supposed to present various events and issues from a variety of positions to help individual citizens educate themselves and decide their personal view. When Political correctness is thrown into the mix, and simultaneously the media becomes a team of journalistic thugs freely twisting and manipulating the “news” for the agenda of the “majority” party, clearly, the people are VICTIMS of POLITICAL ABUSE! It is nothing less than MOB RULE. This is specifically why our FOUNDERS established America as a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, NOT a Democracy! But the KEY to a Republic is the participation of the People! Oooops!
“A community declines when the majority of its citizens become selfish, and under this influence it slowly dismantles all the restraints upon self-indulgence established by manners, customs, beliefs and law: tradition. (See the law of reverse civilization) As each subsequent generation of selfish citizens inherits control of the community, it takes its opportunity to abandon more of the irksome restraints that genius and wisdom had installed. The proponents of this social demolition achieve their irrational purpose by publicly embracing absurdity through slogans while vilifying any who do not support their stance. The purpose of the slogan is to enshrine irrational fears, or fancies, as truth through the use of presumptuous words, so public pronouncement:
Dissembles the real nature of the claim: example – “FORWARD!“
Identifies any dissenters as enemies of the truth – “Tolerance” or “COEXIST”, that is People who contradict “FORWARD are blinded by prejudice and moving “backwards.”
Acts as an excuse for any crimes committed in its name” – “Racists” or “Terrorists”, that is People who contradict this claim are trouble-making bigots, which makes them enemies of the community, if not humanity, and deserving persecution!
“Now, in the late 1990s, the results of being bourgeois (retaining traditional notions), is being labelled racist, sexist etc. and risk losing your job, your reputation, being jostled in the street, being subject to judicial penalty and death threats. And it is this very extremity of reaction that has won media attention and the name Political Correctness, though the reaction will become even more unpleasant with the next generation.”
America is different than most other nations in that our Constitution claims “Providence,” or “our Creator” as the Source of our Basic Human Rights. These then, are written as the Bill of Rights, which, incidentally, our new CIA Director, John Brennan omitted from the draft Constitution he was sworn into office upon. Odd, don’t you think? That’s like removing the spinal column from a human being! The fact that our Rights issue from God means that the government is not their source, and therefore cannot rightly take them away. Most other nations have the Source of their Law, their human rights, as the head of political power or the seat of government.
The Founders were extremely knowledgeable about the issue of democracy and feared a democracy as much as a monarchy. They understood that the only authority that can take away the people’s freedom is their own government, either by being too weak to protect them from external threats (anarchy – chaos) or by becoming too powerful and taking over every aspect of life (tyranny). In a Republic, the sovereignty resides with the people themselves. In a Republic, one may act on his own (as an individual) or through his representatives when he chooses to solve a problem. The people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government is a servant of the people, and obliged to its owner, We the People.
Many politicians as well as citizens have lost sight of that fact. Instead, we allow the government to dictate what size drink we may buy, our use of baby formula, or cigarettes. We are letting politicians tell us to compromise on our 2nd Amendment Rights to Keep and bear arms to protect the other rights granted us by God. We are bowing to a government dictate for public funded “free” birth control to low income people while they mock our freedom to worship and live morally as we choose.
The Freedom of Religion means I, the individual, get to choose whether I live by one of the known religions or none at all, but it is individual choice, not federal mandate.
Right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness means I, the individual, have the freedom to pursue my dreams, my goals, my ambition as far as my energy and resources may take me. They do NOT guarantee me happiness or unlimited resources.
Just because I, the individual, am guaranteed the Right to keep and bear arms, doesn’t mean I HAVE to keep or bear arms. It only means I have the freedom to do so, if I wish.
We are without an anchor in a violent storm with the media and politicians TELLING us what is “acceptable” and what is not. They are BULLYING us, my friends! They are bullying us into giving up our FREEDOM!
Freedom means choice. The liberal left, in their misunderstanding of the Constitution, is determined to restrict and regulate as much of American life as they can. That is not freedom, nor is it security they provide by their invasion into our personal lives. They do not believe the average American is capable of making reasonably intelligent decisions concerning Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I do! Like Sen Feinstein on the 2nd Amendment, they believe they have been given the RIGHT (by election or Divine Right of Kings?) to make decisions FOR us. Rather than applying Constitutional law to facilitate the individual’s life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, they are working toward greater and deeper control of our lives, for our own good, they promise, yet they are not willing to abide by the regulations and restrictions they impose on us.
How much more abuse will it take, my friends? The politically correct attitudes and nuances of today will become the regulations and mandates of tomorrow. Let’s take our place in this noble experiment and require our government to SUPPORT & DEFEND the CONSTITUTION they SWORE to uphold or change it in the prescribed manner! Let’s hold their feet to the fire … journalists, too, and require them to DO their JOB!!! Let’s remind them we understand the Constitution, and we know our place in keeping our leaders accountable!
The vast wealth of knowledge and wisdom expressed by those who are credited with the FOUNDING of our nation continues to astonish me. Now, we must keep in mind that this experiment was part of a “GLOBAL” enterprise, even then. Britain ruled the seas, but France and Spain competed for global dominance. Yet, in spite of this, rogue pirates from the northern coast of Africa, the Barbary Coast, swarmed the seas capturing vessels and individuals for ransom.
The Barbary pirates, early Islamists, operated off the coast of North Africa and throughout the Mediterranean Sea as far back as the time of the Crusades. The Barbary pirates sailed as far north as Iceland, attacking ports, seizing captives as slaves, and plundering merchant ships. Most nations equipped with sea-going vessels found it easier, and cheaper, to pay a “tribute” to the pirates rather than fight them in a war for passage through the Mediterranean. European nations often worked out treaties with the Islamist pirates from the Barbary Coast. By the early 19th century, the pirates were essentially sponsored by the Arab rulers of Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli.
Our Founders were fully aware of these pirates, and Washington and Adams both continued the tradition of Europe and paid the required tributes to afford safe passage throughout the seaways while our infant nation stabilized and prepared for war. When Thomas Jefferson took office, he took a different tact.
Preparation for War courtesy New York Public Library Digital Collections
“The US government adopted a policy of essentially paying bribes, or tribute, to the pirates in its infancy, but Jefferson objected to the policy of paying tribute in the 1790s. Having been involved in negotiations to free Americans held by North African pirates, he believed paying tribute only invited more problems.
The young US Navy was preparing to deal with the problem by building a few ships destined to fight the pirates off Africa. Work on the frigate Philadephia was depicted in a painting titled “Preparation for WAR to Defend Commerce.”
The Philadelphia was launched in 1800 and saw service in the Caribbean before becoming involved in a pivotal incident in the first war against the Barbary pirates.”
Algerian Corsair off a Barbary port – Andries Van Eertvelt
Incensed by the audacity of these Barbary pirates, Thomas Jefferson refused to pay any more tribute. In May 1801, two months after his inauguration, the pasha of Tripoli declared war on the United States. The US Congress never issued an official declaration of war in response, but Jefferson dispatched a newly formed naval squadron to the coast of North Africa to deal with the pirates.
The American Navy’s show of force quickly calmed the situation. Some pirate ships were captured, and the Americans established successful blockades.
But the tide turned against the United States when the frigate Philadelphia ran aground in the harbor of Tripoli (in present day Libya) and the captain and crew were captured.
The capture of the Philadelphia was a victory for the pirates, but their triumph was short-lived.
The USS Philadelphia ran aground off the shore of Tripoli and was attacked and burned by the pirate ship Intrepid. The Philedelphia was soon re-captured by Stephen Decatur
In February 1804, Lieutenant Stephen Decatur of the US Navy, sailing a captured ship, managed to sail into the harbor at Tripoli and recapture the Philadelphia. He burned the ship so it couldn’t be used by the pirates. Decatur’s daring action became a naval legend.
Stephen Decatur became a national hero in the United States and he was promoted to captain.
The captain of the Philadelphia, who was eventually released, was William Bainbridge. He later went on to greatness in the US Navy. Coincidentally, one of the US Navy ships involved in action against pirates off Africa in April 2009 was the USS Bainbridge, which is named in his honor.
In April 1805 the US Navy, with US Marines, launched an operation against the port of Tripoli. The objective was to install a new ruler.
The detachment of Marines, under the command of Lieutenant Presley O’Bannon, led a frontal assault on a harbor fort at the Battle of Derna. O’Bannon and his small force captured the fort.
Marking the first American victory on foreign soil, O’Bannon raised an American flag over the fortress. The mention of the “shores of Tripoli” in the “Marine’s Hymn” refers to this triumph.
Marine Corps Officers “Mameluke Sabre Sword
A new pasha was installed in Tripoli, and he presented O’Bannon with a curved “Mameluke” sword, which is named for North African warriors. To this day Marine dress swords replicate the sword given to O’Bannon.
The pervading threat of the Barbary pirates faded to background noise, especially as the age of imperialism conquered and divided the African states which came under the control of European powers. Pirates were mainly found off the coast of the young America and in adventure tales until incidents off the coast of Somalia made headlines in the spring of 2009.
The Barbary Wars were relatively minor engagements, especially when compared to European wars of the period. Yet they provided heroes and thrilling tales of patriotism to the United States as a young nation, and can be said to have opened the eyes of the young nation to the blind agenda of Islam and helped America’s conception of itself as a player on the international stage.
At the mosque today, a man takes the pulpit.
He warns us quite gravely that we are all culprits;
Islam is the true religion, it would seem.
The others seem destined to fail, in his dream.
So we’re told to convert them: The Christians and the Jews.
The Pagans, the Buddhists, and the Brahmin Hindus.
I take great offense at his words and inflection.
Politely I stand, and I pose him a question.
“Don’t two rivers eventually reach the same sea?
Are any of them really that different from me?”
Calling me a “kafir”, he says I’m incorrect,
And my sacrilege’s earned me a ticket to heck.
On what grounds am I not a good Muslim? I snort.
Could it be that my beard is two inches too short?
Or perhaps my trousers are two inches too long?
Surely covering my ankles can’t be that wrong.
Was I three degrees west of Makkah when I prayed?
Was I corrupted by the video games I played?
Or when I ate with my left hand at lunch that one time?
If I’m to be condemned, at least tell me my crime.
Maybe it’s because I treat others as equals.
Not as non-believers but as regular people.
Maybe my priorities are different from yours.
Rather than head scarves and beard paint, I help the poor.
It might be the fact that I don’t speak for the crowd.
Or force my opinions onto others, out loud.
Is it that I don’t quote the Quran when I speak?
On what criteria have you made this critique?
What will get me to heaven? Please tell me good sir!
Why are you so unwilling to let us confer?
Why do you resist, when I ask for your help?
Could it be that you don’t know the answers yourself?
Could it be, that on some mountain height,
It won’t be blasphemous, if one said “Brahma’s might”?
Could it be that Muslims, Hindus, Christians and Jews,
All touched the same spirit through the God that they knew?
It really matters not, in what building you pray.
And if your beliefs aren’t set in stone, then that’s OK.
Take your time, teach yourself, then you’ll understand.
At the end of the day, we all share God’s own land.
NOTE: As it happens, I do not agree with the totality of this message, but the point may be that many believers in many religions really don’t know what they believe or why. I believe it is vital to understand the basic tenets of whatever faith you espouse.
The right of Westerners to speak freely regarding Islam-related topics — radical Islam or Islamism, Islamist terrorism, and Islamist terror funding — is in jeopardy. Islamists and their sympathizers try to silence any and all questions possibly critical of Islam with a vicious, multi-pronged assault until a critic is silenced, punished, or made an example of for others. [a simple intimidation technique used by gangs and thugs from many cultures throughout history]
Islamists seem to use at least three different methods: 1) the initiation of legal proceedings, known as “lawfare” — i.e., frivolous or malicious lawsuits which often do not even hope to succeed in court and are reluctant to reach discovery to avoid disclosing information, but which therefore seem intended, on charges of hate speech or defamation, to harass and financially crush the defendant; 2) threats of violence, or violence itself; or 3) pressure applied based on political correctness, as with attempts to smear reputations by alleging “racism,” “Islamophobia,” or other epithets. Sometimes the Islamists use only one of these methods — sometimes two, or all three. Regardless, the assault is often successful.
the “bomb in the turban” picture of Mohammed — was drawn by Kurt Westergaard
The Danish cartoon controversy, for example, began in September of 2005, after an author in Denmark stated that he could not find an artist willing, under his own name, to illustrate a book about the Islamic Prophet Mohammed’s life. In Islam, it is considered blasphemous to draw a picture of the prophet. In response, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten ran twelve cartoons by various artists depicting Mohammed, with the editor explaining that the project was an attempt to defend the Danish right to exercise free speech and to contribute to the debate regarding criticism of Islam and self-censorship. The most controversial of these cartoons — the “bomb in the turban” picture of Mohammed — was drawn by Kurt Westergaard. These cartoons were soon reprinted in magazines/newspapers in more than 50 other countries. However, the only major U.S. magazines/newspapers to reprint any of the cartoons were the conservative Weekly Standard, the atheist Free Inquiry, and the Denver Rocky Mountain News. Many organizations cited their unwillingness to publish them out of concern for the sensitivities of Muslim readers. A fear of violence may also have been a significant concern.
Soon after the cartoons were published, Islamist, Islamic, or politically correct pressure groups swung into action. In October of 2005, some ambassadors from Muslim countries sent a letter requesting a meeting with Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, stating that they wished to discuss the “on-going smearing campaign in Danish public circles and media against Islam and Muslims.” They also hinted that the Danish government should legally prosecute the paper’s editors.
At the same time, a nearly identical letter arrived in Copenhagen from the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC — now known as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation), an intergovernmental organization of fifty-seven Muslim states, also protesting the publication of the cartoons. As noted here, “[t]he diplomatic protests aimed to use international disapproval to sanction the newspaper — and the Danes — for Islamophobia,” an invented term patterned after the term “homophobia.” Coinciding with the arrival of the letters, three thousand Danish Muslims demonstrated in Copenhagen and demanded an apology from the newspaper for insulting Muslims.
The Danish prime minister, however, refused to bend to the politically correct pressure and declined to meet with the ambassadors. As he explained, “[t]his is a matter of principle. I won’t meet with them because it is so crystal clear what principles Danish democracy is built upon that there is no reason to do so. As prime minister, I have no power whatsoever to limit the press –nor do I want such a power.” He did concede, however, that offended parties could attempt to seek legal relief from Danish courts.
Sure enough, later that same month, several Danish Muslim organizations filed a complaint with the Danish police claiming that the Jyllands-Posten had committed an offense under the law. They cited sections 140 and 266b of the Danish Criminal Code. Section 140 is the blasphemy law, which prohibits disturbing public order by publicly ridiculing or insulting the dogmas of worship of any lawfully existing religious community in Denmark. Section 266b criminalizes insults, threats, or degradation of natural persons, by publicly and with malice attacking their race, color of skin, national or ethnical roots, faith, or sexual orientation. But in early 2006, the Danish regional public prosecutor discontinued the investigation, as he ruled that the cartoons concerned a subject of public interest and thus were protected. This judgment was later confirmed by the highest Danish authority, the director of public prosecutions. Although his ruling protected the speech rights of the Danish cartoonists in this case, the director still insisted on correcting Jyllands-Posten’s expansive view of the right to free expression in the Danish code:
Although there is no basis for instituting criminal proceedings in this case, it should be noted that both provisions (Sections 140 & 266b) of the Danish Criminal Code contain a restriction of the freedom of expression[.] … To the extent publicly made expressions fall within the scope of these rules there is, therefore, no free and unrestricted right to express opinions about religious subjects. It is thus not a correct description of existing law when the article in Jyllands-Posten states that it is incompatible with the right to freedom of expression[.]
Of course, a legal dead end was not the end of the pressure. In December of 2005, two Danish imams began a tour of the Middle East to publicize the Jyllands-Posten drawings. In their “dossier,” the imams stuffed some other inflammatory information, including three additional — and more insulting — pictures, untruthful allegations of discrimination against Muslims in the West, and an interview discussing Islam with Dutch then-member of parliament and former Muslim-turned-critic of Islam Ayaan Hirsi Ali. (Ayaan Hirsi Ali had once been honored for her advocacy for free speech by the Danish governing party.) This first imam tour, and a second tour by the same individuals, as well as instigation by various Arab governments, led to widespread protesting across the Muslim world throughout 2006. In the Muslim world, protestors took to the streets, destroying buildings, burning the Danish flag, and sometimes setting fire to Danish embassies. Eventually, more than 200 people were killed and hundreds more injured in violence surrounding the publication — and republication — of the cartoons.
Most disturbingly, starting in 2005, and continuing until today, Muslim radicals began to physically threaten Jyllands-Posten’s employees, the cartoon artists, and Danes in general for the drawing and the publishing of the Mohammed cartoons. Most prominent among the Islamist targets was cartoonist Kurt Westergaard, who was immediately forced into hiding under police protection. Since 2005, there have been countless threats, plots, and/or attacks against Danish targets stemming from these cartoons. Here are just some of the more prominent ones:
In 2005, a Pakistani Islamist party offered a reward to anyone who killed a cartoonist.
In 2008, the Danish Embassy in Islamabad was damaged in a suicide vehicle bombing. The bombing killed six people and wounded 30, mostly Pakistani Muslims.
In 2009, following the arrest of U.S. citizen David Headley for planning the 2008 Mumbai attacks, American officials learned that Headley had also conducted surveillance in Denmark for an attack against Jyllands-Posten, with the codename of “The Mickey Mouse Project.”
In 2010, Danish police shot and wounded an Islamist at the home of Kurt Westergaard. The Islamist broke down the front door with the axe, before being stopped by the door to a panic room. Luckily, neither Westergaard nor his five-year-old granddaughter was harmed. Although sentenced to nine years in prison in 2011, the terrorist appealed the sentence, claiming that he was only trying to scare Westergaard to make him “stop bragging about drawing the cartoon.” His sentence was subsequently affirmed.
In 2011, three Norwegian Muslims were prosecuted for planning to bomb the offices of the Jyllands-Posten. On the first day of the trial, the prosecutors said the plot was planned with al-Qaeda in Pakistan, which is where one of the men had been trained.
by Gerard W. Gawalt Gerard W. Gawalt is the manuscript specialist for early American history in the Manuscript Division, Library of Congress.
“The ruthless, supremely committed element of radical Islam we face today are not new to the United States of America.
More than two hundred years ago the newly established United States faced Muslim pirates that were the scourge of the Mediterranean Sea and a significant area of the North Atlantic. Their practice was to attack any and every ship and ransom the captives. Pirate ships and crews from the North African states of Tripoli, Tunis, Morocco, and Algiers (the Barbary Coast) became the extortionists of the seas and presented a radically different threat to the young American nation.
“Before the United States obtained its independence in the American Revolution, 1775-83, American merchant ships and sailors had been protected from the ravages of the North African pirates by the naval and diplomatic power of Great Britain. British naval power and the tribute or subsidies Britain paid to the piratical states protected American vessels and crews. During the Revolution, the ships of the United States were protected by the 1778 alliance with France, which required the French nation to protect “American vessels and effects against all violence, insults, attacks, or depredations, on the part of the said Princes and States of Barbary or their subjects.”
“After the United States won its independence in the treaty of 1783, it had to protect its own commerce against dangers such as the Barbary pirates. As early as 1784 Congress followed the tradition of the European shipping powers and appropriated $80,000 as tribute to the Barbary states, directing its ministers in Europe, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, to begin negotiations with them. Trouble began the next year, in July 1785, when Algerians captured two American ships and the dey of Algiers held their crews of twenty-one people for a ransom of nearly $60,000.” (Gawalt)
“How many know that perhaps 1.5 million Europeans and Americans were enslaved in Islamic North Africa between 1530 and 1780? We dimly recall that Miguel de Cervantes was briefly in the galleys. But what of the people of the town of Baltimore in Ireland, all carried off by “corsair” raiders in a single night?
Some of this activity was hostage trading and ransom farming rather than the more labor-intensive horror of the Atlantic trade and the Middle Passage, but it exerted a huge effect on the imagination of the time—and probably on no one more than on Thomas Jefferson. Peering at the paragraph denouncing the American slave trade in his original draft of the Declaration of Independence, later excised, I [Christopher Hitchens] noticed for the first time that it sarcastically condemned “the Christian King of Great Britain” for engaging in “this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers.” The allusion to Barbary practice seemed inescapable.”
“In 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams met with Tripoli’s ambassador to Great Britain to ask him by what right his nation attacked American ships and enslaved American citizens. He claimed that the right was founded on the laws of their prophet and that it was written in the Koran that all nations that didn’t acknowledge their authority were sinners, and that not only was it their right and duty to make war upon these sinners wherever they could be found, but to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Muslim slain in battle was guaranteed a place in Paradise. Despite this stunning admission of pre-meditated violence on non-Muslim nations, as well as the objections of numerous notable Americans, including George Washington, who warned that caving in was both wrong and would only further embolden their enemy, the United States Congress continued to buy off the Barbary Muslims with bribes and ransom money.
“They paid Tripoli, Tunis, Morocco, and Algiers upwards of one million dollars a year over the next fifteen years, which by 1800 amounted to 20% of the United States annual revenues. Jefferson was disgusted. To add insult to injury, when he was sworn in as the third president of the United States in 1801, the pasha of Tripoli sent him a note demanding an immediate payment of $225,000 plus $25,000 a year thereafter. That was when everything changed!
Jefferson let the pasha know in no uncertain terms what he could do with his demand. The pasha responded by chopping down the flagpole in front of the US Consulate and declaring war on the United States. Tunis, Morocco and Algiers followed suit.” (The Last Patriot, by Brad Thor)
“Thomas Jefferson, United States minister to France, opposed the payment of tribute, as he later testified in words that have a particular resonance today. In his autobiography, Jefferson wrote that in 1785 and 1786 he unsuccessfully “endeavored to form an association of the powers subject to habitual depredation from them. I accordingly prepared, and proposed to their ministers at Paris, for consultation with their governments, articles of a special confederation.” Jefferson argued that “The object of the convention shall be to compel the piratical States to perpetual peace.” Jefferson prepared a detailed plan for the interested states. “Portugal, Naples, the two Sicilies, Venice, Malta, Denmark and Sweden were favorably disposed to such an association,” Jefferson remembered, but there were “apprehensions” that England and France would follow their own paths, “and so it fell through.”
“Paying the ransom would only lead to further demands, Jefferson argued in letters to future presidents John Adams, then America’s minister to Great Britain, and James Monroe, then a member of Congress. As Jefferson wrote to Adams in a July 11, 1786, letter, “I acknolege [sic] I very early thought it would be best to effect a peace thro’ the medium of war.” Paying tribute will merely invite more demands, and even if a coalition proves workable, the only solution is a strong navy that can reach the pirates, Jefferson argued in an August 18, 1786, letter to James Monroe: “The states must see the rod; perhaps it must be felt by some one of them. . . . Every national citizen must wish to see an effective instrument of coercion, and should fear to see it on any other element than the water. A naval force can never endanger our liberties, nor occasion bloodshed; a land force would do both.” “From what I learn from the temper of my countrymen and their tenaciousness of their money,” Jefferson added in a December 26, 1786, letter to the president of Yale College, Ezra Stiles, “it will be more easy to raise ships and men to fight these pirates into reason, than money to bribe them.”
“Jefferson’s plan for an international coalition foundered on the shoals of indifference and a belief that it was cheaper to pay the tribute than fight a war. The United States’s relations with the Barbary states continued to revolve around negotiations for ransom of American ships and sailors and the payment of annual tributes or gifts. Even though Secretary of State Jefferson declared to Thomas Barclay, American consul to Morocco, in a May 13, 1791, letter of instructions for a new treaty with Morocco that it is “lastly our determination to prefer war in all cases to tribute under any form, and to any people whatever,” the United States continued to negotiate for cash settlements. In 1795 alone the United States was forced to pay nearly a million dollars in cash, naval stores, and a frigate to ransom 115 sailors from the dey of Algiers. Annual gifts were settled by treaty on Algiers, Morocco, Tunis, and Tripoli.
“When Jefferson became president in 1801 he refused to accede to Tripoli’s demands for an immediate payment of $225,000 and an annual payment of $25,000. The pasha of Tripoli then declared war on the United States. Although as secretary of state and vice president he had opposed developing an American navy capable of anything more than coastal defense, President Jefferson dispatched a squadron of naval vessels to the Mediterranean. As he declared in his first annual message to Congress: “To this state of general peace with which we have been blessed, one only exception exists. Tripoli, the least considerable of the Barbary States, had come forward with demands unfounded either in right or in compact, and had permitted itself to denounce war, on our failure to comply before a given day. The style of the demand admitted but one answer. I sent a small squadron of frigates into the Mediterranean. . . .”
The American show of force quickly awed Tunis and Algiers into breaking their alliance with Tripoli. The humiliating loss of the frigate Philadelphia and the capture of her captain and crew in Tripoli in 1803, criticism from his political opponents, and even opposition within his own cabinet did not deter Jefferson from his chosen course during four years of war. The aggressive action of Commodore Edward Preble (1803-4) forced Morocco out of the fight and his five bombardments of Tripoli restored some order to the Mediterranean. However, it was not until 1805, when an American fleet under Commodore John Rogers and a land force raised by an American naval agent to the Barbary powers, Captain William Eaton, threatened to capture Tripoli and install the brother of Tripoli’s pasha on the throne, that a treaty brought an end to the hostilities. Negotiated by Tobias Lear, former secretary to President Washington and now consul general in Algiers, the treaty of 1805 still required the United States to pay a ransom of $60,000 for each of the sailors held by the dey of Algiers, and so it went without Senatorial consent until April 1806. Nevertheless, Jefferson was able to report in his sixth annual message to Congress in December 1806 that in addition to the successful completion of the Lewis and Clark expedition, “The states on the coast of Barbary seem generally disposed at present to respect our peace and friendship.”
“In fact, it was not until the second war with Algiers, in 1815, that naval victories by Commodores William Bainbridge and Stephen Decatur led to treaties ending all tribute payments by the United States. European nations continued annual payments until the 1830s. However, international piracy in Atlantic and Mediterranean waters declined during this time under pressure from the Euro-American nations, who no longer viewed pirate states as mere annoyances during peacetime and potential allies during war. MORE HERE
“Among the more intriguing stories, the USS Philadelphia, a 44-gun Navy frigate, ran aground off Tripoli in October 1803. The Tripolitans forced the captain and crew to surrender, and they used the Philadelphia for harbor defense against the Americans. On Feb. 16, 1804, Lt. Stephen Decatur, using a captured Tripolitan boat, led a contingent of Marines to seize the Philadelphia and burn it. They also briefly captured Tripoli, but they didn’t recover the captain or crew. Decatur became the first military hero since the Revolution and became a commodore, who kicked more ass in the Second Barbary War in 1815. Tripoli was again captured, and the pirates surrendered in 1805. This is why the Marine Hymn has the phrase, “. . .to the shores of Tripoli.”
Thomas Jefferson understood the same thing Ronald Reagan understood … that the best position for negotiation is from a position of strength. He quickly realized that though he was pledged to “religious freedom,” the brand of Islam involved in this slave trade taught him Islam was not just a religion but a political system as well. The fact that President Obama continues to dismantle and understaff our military, and fail to give them a specific and clear “winnable” objective demonstrates either his lack of resolve OR his resolve to our destruction.
*NOTE: All notations to quoted text are done by blogsensebybarb for emphasis.
The relationship between the Taliban and al-Qaeda was one of the hot topics of Monday night’s (1/16/2012) presidential debate. Candidate Ron Paul downplayed the dangers of the Taliban, declaring the “Taliban used to be our allies when we were fighting the Russians… The al-Qaeda wants to come here to kill us. The Taliban just says we don’t want foreigners.”
The Taliban came on the scene in Afghanistan in 1994, several years after the Soviets departed. Taliban (which translates to “students”) were made up mainly of Afghan refugees who had grown up in Pakistan during Soviet rule in Afghanistan and attended Deobandi religious schools, where they learned a strict, puritanical form of Islam. While some of the current Taliban may have previously fought on the same side of the U.S. during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s, it is inaccurate to say the Taliban as a movement was ever an ally of the United States.
Osama bin Laden’s arrival in Afghanistan in 1996, after he was expelled from Sudan, allowed the terrorist leader to forge a relationship with the like-minded Afghan Islamist movement. The bond that developed between Taliban leader Mullah Omar and bin Laden became so powerful that the Taliban refused to break ties to al-Qaeda and hand over bin Laden shortly after the 9/11 attacks. The Taliban leadership refused to give up support for bin Laden, even though they were undoubtedly aware that their refusal to cooperate with the U.S. would lead to the invasion of Afghanistan.
Not only did the Taliban provide physical protection to the world’s most wanted terrorist, the organization repressed Afghan women and terrorized the country’s minority communities during their rule (1996 – 2001).
Though Paul says the Taliban’s top priority is to expel “foreigners” from Afghanistan, it is more accurate that they seek to expel those who do not share their radical brand of Islamist terrorism and hatred of America. And it remains that the real issue is whether the Taliban has severed ties to al-Qaeda and other terrorists seeking to harm the United States. Without a clear sign that the Taliban have broken their links with international terrorists and are ready to participate in a normal political process, a Taliban return to power in Afghanistan would not only bring despair to the Afghan people, it would herald the revival of al-Qaeda … READ MORE
THIS man is spot on through 60-65% of the issues but the other stuff (cited above) is downright SCARY! What about his leadership skills? What about his “political career” that has endured DECADES – I thought we were looking for a NON-politician … ? I thought we were looking for FRESH, innovative but practical ideas … What about all the racist, anti-Semitic thoughts in his newsletters published over decades with HIS name. Somethings can be overlooked as insignificant, but I don’t think this is one of those things. Just sayin …
By JON GAMBRELL and NJADVARA MUSA Associated Press
MAIDUGURI, Nigeria January 7, 2012 (AP)
A radical Muslim sect attacked a church worship service in Nigeria’s northeast during assaults that killed at least 15 people, authorities said Saturday, as Christians vowed to defend themselves from the group’s widening sectarian fight against the country’s government.
The attacks by the sect known as Boko Haram came after it promised to kill Christians living in Nigeria’s largely Muslim north, exploiting long-standing religious and ethnic tensions in the nation of more than 160 million people. The pledge by the leader of an umbrella organization called the Christian Association of Nigeria now raises the possibility of retaliatory violence.
In the last few days alone, Boko Haram has killed at least 44 people, despite the oil-rich nation’s president declaring a state of emergency in regions hit by the sect.
Speaking Saturday to journalists, Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor, president of the Christian Association of Nigeria, vowed the group’s members would adequately protect themselves from the sect. He declined to offer specifics, raising concerns about retaliation…READ MORE
Faith or belief in the Oneness of God [not identical to Jehovah / Jesus] and the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad;
Establishment of the daily prayers;
Concern for and almsgiving to the needy;
Self-purification through fasting; and
The pilgrimage to Makkah for those who are able.
* ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ *
“There is none worthy of worship except God
and Muhammad is the messenger of God.”
This declaration of faith is called the Shahadah,
a simple formula that all the faithful pronounce.
The significance of this declaration is the belief
that the only purpose of life is to serve and obey God,
and this is achieved through the teachings and practices
of the Last Prophet, Muhammad.
* ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ *
Problem seems to be the warring tribes, various offshoots of Islam, just like the many denominations of Christianity, but – for the most part – Christian tribes are not at war with the rest of the world. Although certainly numerous crimes have been committed in the name of Christianity, most people recognize those perpetrators as “outlaws” of the faith, portraying a skewed Biblical message. Not all Muslims are violent or prone to jihad, but until the peace-loving Muslims take control and correct the tenets of their “faith,” the murderous jihads will continue, and the WEST – particularly the USA needs to educate itself about who and what Islam really is! Deal with it!
At some point, however, the WEST needs to realize Islam is NOT simply a religion, but a political system with it’s own religion and its own laws. In contrast, the Quran calls all non-Muslims are unbelievers or infidels. The treatment of the infidels in Islam is divided into two categories. The polytheists, pagans, idolaters and heathens have the choice of converting to Islam or suffer death. The Jews and Christians, whom the Koran calls people of the book, can retain their religion but on the sufferance of accepting humiliation and subjugation to Islam and payment of Jizyah (poll-tax) to the Islamic rulers.
Now I do not claim to be knowledgeable on this topic, but I know a couple EXCELLENT websites to check. I read them almost daily Christians. One is Bare Naked Islam. Another is Creeping Sharia. I highly recommend these websites for information of issues O ilam interest. For decades, Islamic hatred has been focused on Israel, but now, it is bleeding over to those who share the Abraham’s paternity – the Christians.
In its latest move to effect religious cleansing in Africa’s largest country, Boko Haram — the Nigerian Islamist movement that claimed responsibility for the deadly Christmas Day bombings of a Catholic church, an evangelical church, and three police stations — is now reportedly warning all Christians in Nigeria’s mainly Muslim north to evacuate by Friday or else face new attacks. It also vowed to confront Nigerian troops sent to quell four of the northern states it has targeted with violence.
Catholic archbishop John Onaiyekan, of Abuja, Nigeria’s capital city, appealed for help. “It’s a national tragedy. We are all unsecured. It’s not only Catholic. Today it’s us. Tomorrow we don’t know who it will be,” he said. Nigeria’s Catholic bishops report that some 200 individuals, mostly Catholic worshippers, were killed in the coordinated Christmas bombings.
According to the Vatican news agency Fides, Nigeria’s Catholic bishops called on Islamic leaders to speak up and take measures to end the violence. On behalf of the bishops, Archbishop Ade Job, president of the Episcopal Conference of Nigeria, issued a desperate plea: “Members of the Boko Haram sect have claimed responsibility for this shameful crime against God and humanity. We use this opportunity to call on our peace-loving Muslims, especially their leaders from the political, economic, social, and religious spectrums, not only to publicly denounce these acts, but for their own good and good of Nigeria . . . to do everything positive to end this movement.”
So far, this plea has been met with silence from Nigeria’s Sunni religious leaders. No doubt some are afraid that they too will become targets if they dissent from Boko Haram’s dictates.
Western analysts debate whether, as U.S. AfriCom commander Gen. Carter Ham asserts, Boko Haram is linked to al-Qaeda, or is, as stated by others, a diffuse group of local Sunni Muslims. In any event, former U.S. ambassador John Campbell, now an expert with the Council on Foreign Relations, who takes the latter view, said that a group calling itself Boko Haram could very well launch the cleansing campaign as threatened…READ MORE
By BosNewsLife News Center with reports from Africa and Asia
AKARTA/ABUJA/BUDAPEST (BosNewsLife)– North Korea leads a list of nations where “Christians face the most severe persecution”, but “Muslim-majority” countries represent nine of the top 10 amid spreading Islamic extremism around the world, a major Christian watchdog said in comments obtained by BosNewsLife Thursday, January 5.
The group, Open Doors, said its annual World Watch List (WWL) placed the Communist-run nation at the top spot for the “10th time” as North Korea built a “bizarre quasi-religion” around the country’s founder Kim Il-Sung. Anyone with “another god” is automatically persecuted, Open Doors said. Up to 400,000 Christians are believed to worship underground, while up to 70,000 Christians are held in “ghastly prison camps”, according to rights investigators.
“How the death of Kim Jong-Il last month and the coming to power of his son Kim Jong-Un will affect the status of Christians in North Korea is hard to determine at this early stage,” explained Carl Moeller, who leads the Open Doors USA branch of the international group serving “persecuted Christians” worldwide… CONTINUE READING
Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani has become a face of the persecuted around the world. Since 2009, the Iranian regime has imprisoned Pastor Nadarkhani under the threat of death for his faith in Jesus Christ. His story has illuminated the plight of so many others who also face persecution for their faith…CONTINUE READING