Results 1 to 4 of 4
Like Tree2Likes

Thread: Jefferson And Islam

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Super Moderator Newmexican's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Heart of Dixie
    Posts
    36,012

    Jefferson And Islam

    Jefferson And Islam




    Published on Jul 12, 2012
    Glenn Beck interviews David Barton, author of "Original Intent' on Islam

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htfX1FUuxGw

  2. #2
    Super Moderator Newmexican's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Heart of Dixie
    Posts
    36,012
    Tripoli Monument at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland
    by Giovanni C Micali


    Scroll down for 18 pictures
    Click here for more info

    See more in Annapolis & at the Naval Academy
    Including Navy Bill & Tecumseh, Bancroft Hall & Herndon Monument, .



    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010005999 (added ca. 2006)


    TO THE MEMORY OF SOMERS, CALDWELL, DECATUR, WADSWORTH, DORSEY, ISRAEL

    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002819 (added ca. 2006)


    TO THE MEMORY OF SOMERS, CALDWELL, DECATUR, WADSWORTH, DORSEY, ISRAEL

    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002829 (added ca. 2006)



    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002859 (added ca. 2006)



    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010006009 (added ca. 2006)



    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002839 (added ca. 2006)



    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010006019 (added ca. 2006)



    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010006029 (added ca. 2006)



    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010006049 (added ca. 2006)



    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002869 (added ca. 2006)



    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002809 (added ca. 2006)



    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002849 (added ca. 2006)


    THE TRIPOLI MONUMENT
    The oldest military monument in the United States honors heroes of the War against the Barbary Coast Pirates, the new republic's first war. In 1804, President Jefferson ordered the nation's tiny naval force to the Mediterranean to protect the expanding trade of the new United States against the pirates, who demanded ransom for safe passage of merchant ships. "Millions for defense, but not on cent for tribute" became the rallying cry for this war. Jefferson's action established the doctrine of extension of power overseas and created a permanent United States Navy.

    On "the shores of Tripoli," young Americans took brave actions against the pirates, including torching their own grounded vessel, the USS Philadelphia, to prevent her use by the pirates. Six men were killed before Tripoli's "pasha" relented. Congress cited them for their gallantry and Captain David Porter, one of the pirates' captives, instituted a campaign for a monument to honor his former shipmates, now heroes.

    The monument was carved in 1806 in Italy, of Carrera marble, and brought to the United States as ballast on board the USS Constitution (Old Ironsides). From the Washington Navy Yard it moved to the west terrace of the national Capitol. It has stood at the Naval Academy since 1860.

    Renovation of the Monument was completed in June 2000 through the leadership of CAPT Warren B. Johnson '47, thanks to gifts from the VADM Eliot H Bryant & Miriam H Bryant Endowments and Friends of the Save the Tripoli Monument Committee.

    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002889 (added ca. 2006)


    The love of Glory inspired them - Fame has crowned their deeds - History records the event - The children of Columbia admire - And commerce laments their fall

    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002899 (added ca. 2006)


    Erected in the memory of Captain Richard Somers, Lieutenant James Caldwell, James Decatur, Henry Wadsworth, Joseph Israel and John Dorsey who fell in the different attacks that were made on the [city?] of Tripoli in the Year of our Lord 180? and in the 28[th] year of the independence of the United States

    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002909 (added ca. 2006)


    As a small tribute of respect to their memory and of admiration of their valour so worthy of imitation their brother officers have erected this monument

    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010002919 (added ca. 2006)


    The monument is in front of the 'Officers & Faculty Club'

    Previous sculpture — Next sculpture
    Go to Annapolis (excluding USNA) — Go to Virginia out of DC area
    Back to top


    0003000/03204_0010006059 (added ca. 2006)


    This brochure was forwarded to dcMemorials.com by Mr. Jorge E. Rivera Toro

    The Tripoli Monument
    The oldest military statue in the United States
    (Carved in 1806)
    Located at the U.S. Naval Academy
    Annapolis Maryland

    Physical Description of the Monument
    The "TRIPOLI" or "Naval" Monument (as it was known initially) was carved in 17th century allegorical style. An art form not easily understood by contemporary Americans, the sculptor used human-like figures to depict the ideals of glory, fame, history & commerce. It was built to stand fifteen feet high, but was raised on a large block of stone when moved to the Capitol building. The Tripoli monument was carved of fifty-two blocks of Italian Carrera marble from the same quarry used by Michaelangelo.
    The central 'rostral column' is patterned after the one used in Rome's Coliseum. It contains images of the prows of enemy ships that had been captured. Surmounting the column is an American eagle, rumored to have been patterned after a gold button from an American naval officer's uniform. The winged angel-like figure, flanking the column and somtimes mistaken for that of "Winged Victory" symbolizes "Fame." At one corner "History" is seen recording the deeds of the Tripolitan heroes for whom the monument is erected. "Commerce" is the figure who honors the Mediterranean Fleet's role in preserving U.S. trade near the Barbary Coast. An Italian interpretation of an American Indian symbolizes the young nation, expanding westward, with the child-like figures at her feet. This maden represents "Columbia," or what is now "America."
    There is speculation among some conservators that the 4 figures are displaced from their original orientation. They surmise that the configuration was likely adjusted when the monument was moved to the west terrace of the Capitol Building from the Navy Yard in 1830. Tripoli is the oldest military monument in this country - and America's first monument to be accepted by the U.S. Congress.

    Lithograph of the "Naval Monument" (later called the "Tripoli Monument") as it appeared when first erected at the Washington Navy Yard in 1808. Note alignment of figures shown here & compare with those of later photos.

    The Tripoli Monument may be found to the east of the Officers' & Faculty Club, between Preble Hall (The Museum) & Leahy Hall, just inside the Maryland Ave Gate, United States Naval Academy.

    Brochure prepared by CAPT Warren B. Johnson, USN (Retired) USNA Class of 1947, at no expense to the government. Printed with funds donated to the "Save the Tripoli Monument Committe" a prevate group under the auspices of the U.S. Naval Academy Alumni Assoc. Text edited & photo by Public Affairs Office, USNA. Front page photo by Conservation Solutions, Inc. Reproductions authorized, with credits.
    www.tripolimonument.cjb.net
    http://www.dcmemorials.com/index_indiv0003204.htm

  3. #3
    Super Moderator Newmexican's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Heart of Dixie
    Posts
    36,012
    First Barbary War (1801–1805)[edit]

    Main article: First Barbary War
    The First Barbary War (1801–1805), also known as the Dodo War or the Barbary Coast War, was the first of two wars fought between the alliance of the United States and The Kingdom of the Two Sicilies against[7] the Northwest African Berber Muslim states known collectively as the Barbary States. These were Tripoli andAlgiers, which were quasi-independent entities nominally belonging to the Ottoman Empire, and (briefly) the independent Sultanate of Morocco. This war began during Thomas Jefferson's term when he refused to pay tribute, an amount that was greatly increased when he became president. A U.S. naval fleet was sent on May 13, 1801, at the beginning of the war under the command of Commodore Richard Dale. Other notable officers in the fleet included Stephen Decatur, assigned to the frigate USS Essex and William Bainbridge in command of Essex which was attached to Commodore Richard Dale's squadron which also includedPhiladelphia, President and Enterprise.[8]
    During this war Philadelphia was blockading Tripoli's harbor when she ran aground on an uncharted reef. Under fire from shore batteries and Tripolitan gunboats, the Captain, William Bainbridge, tried to refloat her by casting off all of her guns and other objects. The ship was eventually captured and the crew taken prisoners and put into slavery. To prevent this powerful war ship from being used by the Barbary pirates the ship was later destroyed by a raiding party led by Stephen Decatur.[9][10]
    Second Barbary War (1815)[edit]

    Main article: Second Barbary War
    The Second Barbary War (1815), also known as the Algerine or Algerian War, was the second of two wars fought between the United States and the Ottoman Empire's North African regencies of Tripoli, Tunis, and Algeria known collectively as the Barbary states. The war between the Barbary States and the U.S. ended in 1815; the international dispute would effectively be ended the following year by the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The war brought an end to the American practice of paying tribute to the pirate states and helped mark the beginning of the end of piracy in that region, which had been rampant in the days of Ottoman domination (16th–18th centuries). Within decades, European powers built ever more sophisticated and expensive ships which the Barbary pirates could not match in numbers or technology.[11]
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_Wars


  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,815
    DEMOCRATS THEN AND NOW

    Obama vs. Jefferson on Islamic terror

    David Barton: See how party founder addressed threat to U.S.

    Published: 01/27/2016 at 10:32 PM David Barton About Email | Archive David Barton is the founder and president of WallBuilders, a national pro-family organization. He is also the author of numerous best-selling books, with the subjects being drawn largely from his massive library of tens of thousands of original writings from the Founding Era. His exhaustive research has rendered him an expert in historical and constitutional issues, and he serves as a consultant to state and federal legislators, has participated in several cases at the Supreme Court, was involved in the development of the History/Social Studies standards for states such as Texas and California, and has helped produce history textbooks now used in schools across the nation.



    Democrats have long heralded Thomas Jefferson (along with Andrew Jackson) as the founder of their Party. i They traditionally hold annual Jefferson-Jackson Day fundraising dinners, and President Obama is one of their most sought after speakers. But this past year, Democrats began to remove any mention of Jefferson’s name from their functions. ii They claim that this is because Jefferson was a bigoted racist, iii but this excuse is historically inaccurate, based on an errant modern portrayal. iv
    iii See, for example, “Connecticut Dems remove Thomas Jefferson from dinner name over slavery,” The Hill, July 23, 2015, and many others.

    If you doubt this, ask yourself why black civil rights leaders over the past two centuries (such as Frederick Douglass, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, Benjamin Banneker, Francis Grimke, Henry Highland Garnett, and so many others) openly praised Jefferson as a racial civil rights pioneer and champion, v as did abolitionists such as John Quincy Adams, Abraham Lincoln, and others. viThey recognized that Jefferson led a vocal lifelong campaign to emancipate all slaves in the United States, but that the laws of Virginia prevented him from freeing his own slaves. (All of this is covered in my new book, “The Jefferson Lies.”)

    The real reason that Democrats should discard Jefferson is that he held nearly no policy position similar to those Democrats hold today. Consider fifteen major categories where the policies of Presidents Jefferson and Obama are opposite.

    1. RADICAL ISLAM AND THE WAR ON TERROR. President Obama’s approach to the War on Terror throughout his two terms has been non-engagement. As described by one national political observer, he “feels the U.S. should do as little as is politically feasible in battling these groups overseas. Bump off some of their bigwigs by drones, bomb them from time to time with air strikes and provide a bit of training and military assistance to their foes.” vii In attempting to negotiate and pacify rather than annihilate and defeat, he has spent $779 billion on the War on Terror, viii making it a big-ticket item in his administration.

    When President Jefferson took office in 1801, he had been personally dealing with Muslim nations for almost two decades, and the terrorism issue was also a big-ticket item for him as well:
    twenty percent of the federal budget was being spent to mollify radical Islamicists.
    ix

    ix I n 1795, entering the final year of George Washington’s presidency, the total had reached sixteen percent of the federal budget (U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, “Historical Statistics of the United States” (New York: Kraus International Publications, 1989), Part 2, p. 1104). It had climbed to twenty percent by the time Jefferson took office six years later (“First Barbary War,” Wikipedia (accessed on January 15, 2016)).


    By way of background, in 1784 shortly after the close of the American Revolution, Congress dispatched Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin as diplomats x to negotiate with five Muslim nations attacking American ships and citizens in the Mediterranean area xi (the same general region where conflict is still occurring today). At that time, America had no military capable of traveling overseas to destroy the seedbed of the war-mongering Islamicists plaguing Americans, so America resorted to large payments of money and goods in attempts to purchase peace and end the attacks.

    This unhappy policy, adopted under the Confederation Congress, continued under President George Washington. Washington expressed his open frustration with this approach, declaring:
    Would to Heaven we had a navy able to reform those enemies to mankind, or crush them into non-existence. xii
    As he neared the close of his presidency, he requested that Congress appropriate money to build a navy capable of traveling to the Mediterranean to smash the Islamicists. xiii Congress did, and the navy was constructed under President John Adams, xiv who became known as “The Father of the Navy.”

    But Adams refused to use the new navy, continuing the payments instead.

    When Jefferson became president, his long experience with Muslim leaders and nations taught him there were three possible solutions: (1) continue to rely on negotiations and diplomacy, which also required large concessions of rights and payments of monies in hopes of placating the terrorists, (2) limit American lifestyles and activities by keeping American business interests and shipping out of that predominately Muslim part of the world (which would destroy American commerce), or (3) use decisive military force to put an end to the attacks. xvi Jefferson discarded the first option out of hand:
    I was very unwilling that we should acquiesce in the . . . humiliation of paying a tribute to those lawless pirates. xvii
    Jefferson had earlier concluded that the second option was bad policy, explaining:
    The persons and property of our citizens are entitled to the protection of our government in all places where they may lawfully go. xviii
    He favored the third option:
    I very early thought it would be best to effect a peace through the medium of war. xix The power of making war often prevents it, and in our case would give efficacy to our desire of peace. xx
    There were several reasons Jefferson believed this option was the best policy:
    Justice is in favor of this opinion; honor favors it; it will procure us respect in Europe (and respect is a safeguard to interest) . . . [and] I think it least expensive [and] equally effectual. xxi
    Understanding that it was time to end terrorist attacks against American persons and interests, he deployed an expeditionary force under General William Eaton and Commodore Edward Preble to exterminate the radical Islamicists. xxii The terrorists, after five years of being pounded by American military superiority, decided the price they were paying was too high and thus signed a treaty of peace. xxiii

    Interestingly, Jefferson understood that in dealing with Islamicists, a drawdown of American forces was bad policy – that an insufficient application of American strength would cause the enemy to escalate their attacks. He therefore initiated a military surge, explaining to Congress:
    There was reason . . . to apprehend that the warfare in which we were engaged with Tripoli [Libya] might be taken up by some others of the Barbary Powers [Algiers, Tunis, Morocco, Turkey, et. al]. A reinforcement therefore was immediately ordered. xxiv
    He also related to Congress an account of how an Islamic warship had attacked a much smaller American vessel and the result was “a heavy slaughter of her [Islamicist] men, without the loss of a single one on our part.” xxv He observed:
    The bravery exhibited by our citizens on that element will, I trust, be a testimony to the world that it is not the want of that virtue which makes us seek their peace but a conscientious desire to direct the energies of our nation to the multiplication of the human race and not to its destruction. xxvi
    We sought peace not because we were weak (as had been the American situation for the previous two decades) but rather because our use of superior military force drove the Islamicists to peace, thus ending further human devastation at their hands. We were willing to take lawless lives in order to save countless times more innocent ones. Waging war in this situation was thus humanitarian.

    Obama holds the opposite view. His refusal to use military force has led to an increasingly strong Iran xxvii(the chief global sponsor of terrorism xxviii) as well as the explosive growth of ISIS, xxix which has been responsible for thousands of civilian murders. xxx ISIS acknowledges that the only army it fears is that of Israel, xxxiand consequently it has largely refrained from martyring Jews (although it loudly blusters about doing so xxxii) But fearing nothing from America, it openly martyrs Christians. (It is a lesson of note that when ISIS murdered Egyptian Coptic Christians, Egypt responded promptly and with decisive military force xxxiii and further martyrdoms halted.)

    Jefferson’s use of unequivocal military force against terrorists brought America its first respite in the decades old Islamic attacks but Obama’s refusal to do so has caused the numbers of murders committed by Islamicists to soar. President Obama would have done well to have heeded Jefferson’s observation that:
    [H]istory bears witness to the fact that a just nation is taken on its word when recourse is had to armaments and wars to bridle others. xxxiv

    2. THE “RELIGION OF PEACE.” President Obama (and other Democratic leaders) often repeat the platitude that Islam is a “religion of peace.” xxxv They therefore place its adherents into positions of influence within the Obama administration, xxxviincluding even those from the Muslim Brotherhood, xxxvii which is recognized as the radical wing of Islam that fuels many of its most violent adherents. xxxviii

    xxxviii Todd Beamon, “UK Declares Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Group, Breaks With Obama,” Newsmax, December 22, 2015; “FBI Chief: Muslim Brotherhood Supports Terrorism,” IPT News, February 11, 2011.

    President Jefferson did not believe that Islam was a religion of peace. He personally learned this from the mouth of its own leaders, and from Islam’s own writings. In 1786 (two years after Congress dispatched him to negotiate with leaders of the terrorists), he and John Adams approached the Muslim Ambassador, inquiring as to the reason behind the unprovoked attacks against America. According to Jefferson:
    We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the grounds of their pretentions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. xxxix

    So why were the Islamicists so fixated on attacking Americans even though America had done nothing against them?
    The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the laws of their prophet [Mohammed], that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged 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. xl
    It was Muslim leaders who told Jefferson that Islam was not intrinsically a religion of peace. Certainly, not all of its adherents were as warlike as the religion itself had historically tended to be (after all, there had been individual Muslims living in America since 1619 xli ),

    xli It is reported that Muslims were among the first slaves arriving in America, and that up to ten percent of slaves were Muslim. Thomas A. Tweed, “Islam in America: From African Slaves to Malcolm X,” National Humanities Center (Accessed on January 15, 2016).

    but wherever Islam was dominant in a nation or a region, lasting peace seldom accompanied it. As the Ambassador affirmed, war was the one sure guarantee of spiritual salvation for Muslims, so they had a compelling spiritual motivation to engage in perpetual violence.


    One way for Americans in Jefferson’s day (and today also) to determine for themselves whether the Ambassador’s claim was true was by reading the Quran for themselves, so the first American edition of the Quran was published during the Jefferson administration. xlii The editor’s preface promised that once Americans had read it for themselves, “Thou wilt wonder that such absurdities have infected the better part of the world and wilt avouch that the knowledge of what is contained in this book [the Koran] will render that [Islamic] law contemptible.” xliii

    Jefferson believed what Islamicists said about their religion and acted accordingly. Obama dismisses the same claims as mere hyperbole and tries to explain why Islamicists do not really mean what they say and why we should ignore what they do.

    http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/obama-vs-...slamic-terror/
    Last edited by artist; 02-09-2016 at 06:36 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. How Thomas Jefferson Responded to Islam in 1801 Puts Barack H. Obama to Shame
    By Newmexican in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-13-2015, 11:05 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-22-2013, 05:55 PM
  3. Left Went Wrong on Islam: awkward fusion Islam / Communism
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-24-2011, 10:23 AM
  4. Jefferson's Koran
    By Crusader01 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-04-2007, 12:41 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •