« | »

The Weekly S&L ‘Hive’ – Please Talk Among Yourselves

Here is our weekly discussion thread, where comments on the general topics of the day are very welcome.

But please remember to post and comment on specific news items in the ‘Reader Selected News’ thread below or via the ‘News Selected By Our Readers’ link found in the sidebar.

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Thursday, July 3rd, 2014. Comments are currently closed.

14 Responses to “The Weekly S&L ‘Hive’ – Please Talk Among Yourselves”

  1. FULL BLOWN INVASION!

    Obama promised to go around Congress, and “transform America” and he is at least keeping his promises to destroy America. Look? Even our own representatives cannot take pictures or be allowed to tour holding centers for illegal immigrants! Our own people, whom we elected to manage our country, are not allowed to manage our country! -Wow! Border agents are threatened with legal action if they report what is being done. Everyone is being threatened to keep quiet. –TYRANNY–

    My only question remaining is, “Isn’t there a contingency plan by our military when our own government, which is clear and evident, becomes corrupt and lawless?” The People have a plan, and it’s in our Constitution, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,…”
    The argument is that we don’t need a militia because we already have a well-regulated militia, our military forces. –Ok then, are they going to come to our aid so that we don’t need a private militia, or are they going to take orders from a despot without question? Will their excuse be, “I didn’t act because I was just following orders.” –Remember, that didn’t work in Nuremberg trials.

    There must be an over-ride button that exceeds the executive. Take another look at the military chain of command fellas. It may look like it stops with the President, but the higher level is “The People.”

    • As a follow up. STILL think there is a difference between the two-party system?

      ~The Thad Cockroach campaign teaming up with democrats to hold the seat.
      ~The continued rejection of the Tea Party and other Libertarians that could be coalitions to defeat democrats, such as the Governor’s race in Virginia that Republicans were comfortable losing.
      ~Republicans quiet or even promoting amnesty to their own demise?
      ~The “nothing will really happen, and no one will be punished” show trials led by Republicans over the latest dozen or so scandals.
      ~The 1-2% gay agenda that seemly has the bulldozer effect of being 98-99% with no push-back.
      ~All those supposed Republican military members who support our own oppression through the NSA, border security, don’t have the courage to pull us out of Arab conflicts, seem to be A-Ok with flooding the military with homosexuals who oppress Christian military members, seem to think Edward Snowden is a criminal and not the criminals he blew the whistle on, are in charge of our V.A. system but don’t have the courage to fix it. –Wow, some reliable Republican military member there!
      ~John McCain is still in office.

      Ooooo, rub your hands together for the 2014 midterms and the 2016 Presidential elections! –Can’t wait to see how Republicans will blow it, or win, but win with liberal Republicans that are nothing but bench warmers until the public gets disgusted with them and democrats re-take the seats by default again in 2018.
      I’m not a bit surprised, and can smell defeat years away, as Republicans don’t even have the marketing know-how or the courage to successfully sell water in a desert.

    • yadayada

      ….but the higher level is “The People.”

      my oath was to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
      and to follow LAWFUL orders. very few that I knew would act in a way that would make obummer happy. were I still enlisted, my choice would be easy.
      that’s why obummer hates the military

    • This must be why the Kenyan decimated the independent Christian brass and replaced them with yes men, and women who would go along with the homosexual / tranny agenda.

      Happy Independence Day everyone! Enjoy it, It could be our last…..

  2. yadayada

    you are quite right Mithrandir; the GOP is all you say they are, and worse. hopefully enough AMERICANS stand up and make their demands heard this next election to get the ball rolling in the right direction. the Tea Party happened and became an undeniable force, though we weren’t actually even a party. thems in power can attempt to ignore us right now, but let’s see what happens in November

    • Yes, and seriously…..what a laughable state of affairs our country is in right now. We are living and watching a parody of ourselves. The most insane option in any situation is the one our government officials choose above all others. It’s INTENTIONAL, and it’s meant to cause turmoil and disgust, that democracy doesn’t work, it’s a failure at every turn.

      And regardless of what happens, it is sure to consist of 2 equally co-dependent and dysfunctional entities as defined by the never-wrong wikipedia entry: (boldface entries, my own)
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codependency

      Codependency is defined as a psychological condition or a relationship in which a person (Republican) is controlled or manipulated by another (Democrat)who is affected with a pathological condition (typically narcissism or drug addiction); and in broader terms, it refers to the dependence on the needs of, or control by, another.[1] It also often involves placing a lower priority on one’s own needs (Republican needs), while being excessively preoccupied with the needs of others (Democrat needs).[2] Codependency can occur in any type of relationship, including family, work, friendship, and also romantic, peer or community relationships.[2] Codependency may also be characterized by denial, low self-esteem, excessive compliance (Republicans), or control patterns.[2] Narcissists (Democrats) are considered to be natural magnets for the codependent.

  3. dasher

    Happy July 4th ladies and gents – I’ll be raising a glass to honor all the Americans that fought for our remaining freedoms. Have a great weekend too!

    Dan
    Atlanta, GA

    • captstubby

      “The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable epoch in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forever more.”
      John Adams

      Adams’s prediction was off by two days. From the outset, Americans celebrated independence on July 4.

      happy 4 th of July to all.

  4. canary

    The Greatest Play in Baseball History

    Dodgers Stadium – 4th inning – April 25th 1976

    Part 1
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZzeEaBHUBM

    Full length with other scenes and footage.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrV8QPQAhxo

    Goosebumps.

  5. canary

    Obama snubs 4th of July with statement on immigrants and soccer players

    AP: Obama: US always has been a nation of immigrants

    July 4 2013 – 7:00 pm Eastern time – Darlene Superville

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Celebrating the ethnic diversity of America, President Barack Obama said more than two dozen foreign-born service members who became U.S. citizens at the White House on the Fourth of July are vivid reminders that welcoming immigrants “is central to our way of life.”

    He pleaded anew for new immigration policies, saying the vast range of backgrounds and experiences that has made America a melting pot for more than 200 years also makes the country stronger.

    He argued that the system must be retooled for the U.S. to remain the greatest nation on earth.

    “The basic idea of welcoming immigrants to our shores is central to our way of life, it is in our DNA,” Obama said

    after the 25 service members representing 15 countries raised their right hands and pledged allegiance to the United States.

    “From all these different strands, we make something new here in America. And that’s why, if we want to keep attracting the best and brightest from beyond our borders, we’re going to have to fix our immigration system, which is broken,” he said. “Pass common-sense immigration reform.

    At the same time, Obama blames House Republicans for delaying action on legislation covering the millions already living in the U.S. illegally. A comprehensive measure the Senate passed last summer has been blocked by House leaders who also have done little to advance their own immigration proposals.

    Obama thanks U.S. Men’s Soccer Team

    Play VideoObama thanks U.S. Men's Soccer Team, military  …

    Obama announced earlier this week that, as a result of inaction on Capitol Hill, he will pursue non-legislative ways he can adjust U.S. immigration policy on his own.

    He scheduled a trip to Texas next week, mostly to raise money for Democratic candidates, but plans not to visit the border.

    “I’m going to keep doing everything I can to keep making our immigration system smarter and more efficient,” Obama said Friday.

    Across the country, more than 100 demonstrators, most in support of immigrants, gathered again Friday outside a U.S. Border Patrol station in Murrieta, California,…

    Earlier this week a crowd of protesters blocked buses carrying women and children migrants who were flown in from overwhelmed Texas facilities.

    The Border Patrol had to take the migrants elsewhere.

    The president explained that[sic] had other reasons to celebrate on Friday.

    “This is always a special day for us because this is Malia’s birthday,” he told guests.

    http://news.yahoo.com/obama-us.....itics.html

    He was to explain how allowing non-English speaking immigrants who don’t know their abc’s were to make our country stronger?

    Vidid? Vivid is the Mexicans patroling the neighborhoods in pick-ups to see who is not home for the holiday.

    And the mf can’t get a US Marine out of a corrupt Mexican jail.
    This is the fm that took his flag pen off.
    This is the fm that refused to salute the flag on many occassions
    This is the fm whose community friend stood on and burned the US flag for a photo-op.

  6. canary

    Claims and timeline Clinton not Chelsea’s biological father, and timeline o

    http://www.analysis-news.com/G.....%20264.htm

  7. canary

    Why isn’t Jeb Bush handing out lolly pops? Back in April…

    “A great country ought to know where those folks are and politely ask them to leave,” he said,

    (adding later that properly targeting people who overstay visas “would restore people’s confidence” in the nation’s immigration system.)

    “But the way I look at this — and I’m going to say this, and it’ll be on tape and so be it.

    The way I look at this is someone who comes to our country because they couldn’t come legally, they come to our country because their families —
    the dad who loved their children —
    was worried that their children didn’t have food on the table.

    And they wanted to make sure their family was intact,
    and they crossed the border because they had no other means to work to be able to provide for their family.

    It’s an act of love. It’s an act of commitment to your family.

    I honestly think that that is a different kind of crime that there should be a price paid,

    but it shouldn’t rile people up that people are actually coming to this country to provide for their families.”

  8. canary

    “In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President, John Adams, wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.” – Barack Obama in Cairo 2009

    Compare to what John Adams actually wrote in 1827-1829

    John Quincy Adams on Islam

    by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

    The average American’s lack of awareness of the past has left our nation in an extremely vulnerable position. The multi-culturalism, pluralism, “diversity,” and political correctness that now blanket American culture mean that many are oblivious to and unconcerned about the threat that Islam poses to the American (and Christian) way of life. The Founders of the American Republic were not so dispossessed. They were well-studied in the ebb and flow of human history, and the international circumstances that could potentially impact America adversely. They, in fact, spoke openly and pointedly about the anti-American, anti-Christian nature of the religion of Islam.

    Consider, for example, the writings of an early President of the United States, John Quincy Adams. Not only did Adams live during the founding era (born in 1767), not only was his father a primary, quintessential Founder, but John Quincy was literally nurtured by his father in the vicissitudes and intricacies of the founding of the Republic. John Adams involved his son at an early age in his own activities and travels on behalf of the fledgling nation. John Quincy accompanied his father to France in 1778, became Secretary to the American Minister to Russia, was the Secretary to his father during peace negotiations that ended the American Revolution in 1783, served as U.S. foreign ambassador, both to the Netherlands and later to Portugal, under George Washington, to Prussia under his father’s presidency, and then to Russia and later to England under President James Madison. He served as a U.S. Senator, Secretary of State under President James Monroe, and then as the nation’s sixth President (1825-1829), and finally as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, where he was a staunch and fervent opponent of slavery.

    After his presidency, but before his election to Congress in 1830, John Quincy penned several essays dealing with one of the many Russo-Turkish Wars. In these essays, we see a cogent, informed portrait of the threat that Islam has posed throughout world history:

    In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust, by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE.

    Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. That war is yet flagrant; nor can it cease but by the extinction of that imposture, which has been permitted by Providence to prolong the degeneracy of man. While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men. The hand of Ishmael will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him. It is, indeed, amongst the mysterious dealings of God, that this delusion should have been suffered for so many ages, and during so many generations of human kind, to prevail over the doctrines of the meek and peaceful and benevolent Jesus (Blunt, 1830, 29:269, capitals in orig.).

    Observe that Adams not only documents the violent nature of Islam, in contrast with the peaceful and benevolent thrust of Christianity, he further exposes the mistreatment of women inherent in Islamic doctrine, including the degrading practice of polygamy.

    A few pages later, Adams again spotlights the coercive, violent nature of Islam, as well as the Muslim’s right to lie and deceive to advance Islam:

    The precept of the koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force (Blunt, 29:274).

    No Christian would deny that many Christians in history have violated the precepts of Christ by mistreating others and even committing atrocities in the name of Christ. However, Adams rightly observes that one must go against Christian doctrine to do so. Not so with Islam—since violence is sanctioned:

    The fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion, is the extirpation of hatred from the human heart. It forbids the exercise of it, even towards enemies. There is no denomination of Christians, which denies or misunderstands this doctrine. All understand it alike—all acknowledge its obligations; and however imperfectly, in the purposes of Divine Providence, its efficacy has been shown in the practice of Christians, it has not been wholly inoperative upon them. Its effect has been upon the manners of nations. It has mitigated the horrors of war—it has softened the features of slavery—it has humanized the intercourse of social life. The unqualified acknowledgement of a duty does not, indeed, suffice to insure its performance. Hatred is yet a passion, but too powerful upon the hearts of Christians. Yet they cannot indulge it, except by the sacrifice of their principles, and the conscious violation of their duties. No state paper from a Christian hand, could, without trampling the precepts of its Lord and Master, have commenced by an open proclamation of hatred to any portion of the human race. The Ottoman lays it down as the foundation of his discourse (Blunt, 29:300, emp. added).

    The Founders were forthright in their assessment of the nature and teachings of Islam and the Quran. Americans and their political leaders would do well to take a sober look at history. To fail to do so will be catastrophic.

    REFERENCES

    Blunt, Joseph (1830), The American Annual Register for the Years 1827-8-9 (New York: E. & G.W. Blunt), 29:267-402, [On-line], URL: http://www.archive.org/stream/.....29blunuoft.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    he Treaty of Tripoli (Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary)

    It was submitted to the Senate by President John Adams, receiving ratification unanimously from the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797, and signed by Adams, taking effect as the law of the land on June 10, 1797.

    The treaty was a routine diplomatic agreement but has attracted later attention because the English version included a clause about religion in the United States.

    As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

    Main article: Barbary Pirate

    For three centuries up to the time of the Treaty, the Mediterranean Sea lanes had been preyed on by the North African Muslim states of the Barbary Coast (Tripoli, Algiers, Morocco and Tunis) through privateering (government-sanctioned piracy).

    Hostages captured by the Barbary pirates were either ransomed or forced into slavery,

    contributing to the greater Ottoman slave trade (of which the Barbary states were a segment). Life for the captives often was harsh, especially for Christian captives, and many died from their treatment.

    Some captives “went Turk”, that is, converted to Islam, a choice that made life in captivity easier for them.[3]

    Before the American Revolution, the British colonies in North America were protected from the Barbary pirates by British warships and treaties.

    Two American ships were captured by Algerian pirates in July 1785 and the survivors forced into slavery, their ransom set at $60,000.

    A rumor that Benjamin Franklin, who was en route from France to Philadelphia about that time, had been captured by Barbary pirates, caused considerable upset in the U.S.[5] Without a standing navy, much less a navy capable of projecting force across an ocean, the U.S. was forced to pay tribute monies and goods to the Barbary nations for the security of its ships and the freedom of its captured citizens. As General William Eaton informed newly appointed Secretary of State John Marshall in 1800,

    “It is a maxim of the Barbary States, that ‘The Christians who would be on good terms with them must fight well or pay well.'”[6]

    Soon after the formation of the United States, privateering in the Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean from the nations of the Barbary Coast prompted the U.S. to initiate a series of so-called peace treaties, collectively known as the Barbary Treaties.

    Signing and ratification[edit]

    President George Washington appointed his old colleague David Humphreys as Commissioner Plenipotentiary on March 30, 1795, in order to negotiate a treaty with the Barbary powers.[7] On February 10, 1796, Humphreys appointed Joel Barlow and Joseph Donaldson as “Junior Agents” to forge a “Treaty of Peace and Friendship”.[8] Under Humphreys’ authority, the treaty was signed at Tripoli on November 4, 1796, and certified at Algiers on January 3, 1797. Humphreys reviewed the treaty and approved it in Lisbon on February 10, 1797.[8]

    The official treaty was in Arabic text,
    and a translated version by Consul-General Barlow was ratified by the United States on June 10, 1797. Article 11 of the treaty was said to have not been part of the original Arabic version of the treaty; in its place is a letter from the Dey of Algiers to the Pasha of Tripoli.

    However, it is the English text which was ratified by Congress. Miller says, “the Barlow translation is that which was submitted to the Senate (American State Papers, Foreign Relations, II, 18-19) and which is printed in the Statutes at Large and in treaty collections generally; it is that English text which in the United States has always been deemed the text of the treaty.”[9]

    The Treaty had spent seven months traveling from Tripoli to Algiers to Portugal and, finally, to the United States, and had been signed by officials at each stop along the way. There is no record of discussion or debate of the Treaty of Tripoli at the time that it was ratified. However, there is a statement made by President Adams on the document that reads:

    President Adams’ signing statement

    Now be it known, That I John Adams, President of the United States of America, having seen and considered the said Treaty do, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, accept, ratify, and confirm the same, and every clause and article thereof. And to the End that the said Treaty may be observed, and performed with good Faith on the part of the United States, I have ordered the premises to be made public; And I do hereby enjoin and require all persons bearing office civil or military within the United States, and all other citizens or inhabitants thereof, faithfully to observe and fulfill the said Treaty and every clause and article thereof.

    Official records show that after President John Adams sent the treaty to the Senate for ratification in May 1797, the entire treaty was read aloud on the Senate floor, and copies were printed for every Senator. A committee considered the treaty and recommended ratification. Twenty-three of the thirty-two sitting Senators were present for the June 7 vote which unanimously approved the ratification recommendation.[10]

    However, before anyone in the United States saw the Treaty, its required payments, in the form of goods and money, had been made in part. As Barlow declared: “The present writing done by our hand and delivered to the American Captain OBrien makes known that he has delivered to us forty thousand Spanish dollars,-thirteen watches of gold, silver & pinsbach,-five rings, of which three of diamonds, one of saphire and one with a watch in it, One hundred & forty piques of cloth, and four caftans of brocade,-and these on account of the peace concluded with the Americans.”[1] However, this was an incomplete amount of goods stipulated under the treaty (according to the Pasha of Tripoli) and an additional $18,000 had to be paid by the American Consul James Leander Cathcart at his arrival on April 10, 1799.[11]

    It was not until these final goods were delivered that the Pasha of Tripoli recognized the Treaty as official. In Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States of America by David Hunter Miller, which is regarded as an authoritative collection of international agreements of the United States between 1776 and 1937,[12] Hunter Miller describes, “While the original ratification remained in the hands of Cathcart… it is possible that a copy thereof was delivered upon the settlement of April 10, 1799, and further possible that there was something almost in the nature of an exchange of ratifications of the treaty on or about April 10, 1799, the day of the agreed settlement.”[11]

    It is then that the Pasha declares in a Letter to John Adams on April 15, 1799, “Whereby we have consummated the Peace which shall, on our side, be inviolate, provided You are Willing to treat us as You do other Regencies, without any difference being made between Us. Which is the whole of what We have, at present, to say to You, wishing you at the same time the most unlimited prosperity.”[11]

    Article 11 has been a point of contention in popular culture disputes on the doctrine of separation of church and state as it applies to the founding principles of the United States. Some religious spokesmen claim variously that — despite unanimous ratification by the U.S. Senate in English — the text which appears as Article 11 in the English translation does not appear in the Arabic text of the treaty.[11] Some historians, secular and religious, have argued that the phrase specifically refers to the government and not the culture, that it only speaks of the founding and not what America became or might become,[13] and that many Founding Fathers and newspapers described America as a Christian nation during the early Republic.[14]

    Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

    According to Frank Lambert, Professor of History at Purdue University,

    the assurances in Article 11 were “intended to allay the fears of the Muslim state by insisting that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced.

    John Adams and the Senate made clear that the pact was between two sovereign states, not between two religious powers.” Lambert writes,

    The assurances were contained in the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797 and were intended to allay the fears of the Muslim state by insisting that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced. John Adams and the Senate made clear that the pact was between two sovereign states, not between two religious powers.[15]
    The treaty was printed in the Philadelphia Gazette and two New York papers, with only scant public dissent, most notably from William Cobbett.[16]

    Miller’s Investigation and Notes
    The translation of the Treaty of Tripoli by Barlow has been questioned, and it has been disputed whether Article 11 in the English version of the treaty ratified by the U.S. Senate corresponds to anything of the same purport in the Arabic version.[21]

    (Note: Obama has often implied Thomas Jefferson was not a Christian because in spite of thousands of books on Christianity, he had one Quran in his library in order to try and understand the Muslim Pirates who captured and enslaved people as still goes on today, or the holding for ransom money.
    Obama has removed it from the library and continues to show it as a souvenier to Muslims that visit the White House. One wonders if he doesn’t take it with him when he leaves)

    Barbary wars[edit]
    Main article: First Barbary War
    The treaty was broken in 1801 by the Pasha of Tripoli over President Thomas Jefferson’s refusal to submit to the Pasha’s demands for increased payments. In the course of negotiating with the Barbary nations, each of the Barbary rulers continuously demanded increased payments to maintain peace, even while occasionally capturing U.S. ships. The Pasha of Tripoli was jealous of the ships the U.S. had recently given to Algeria, and demanded similar payment be made to him. On September 25, 1800, Tripoli captured the U.S. ship, Catherine, robbed the crew and plundered its cargo. The Pasha said this was a mistake and the captain responsible for the capture had been punished. Even so, the Pasha warned Cathcart that either the U.S. send additional payments, or the Pasha would declare war on U.S. vessels within six months.[23]

    The Pasha then commenced thus: “Counsul there is no Nation I wish more to be at Peace with than yours, but all Nations pay me & so must the Americans.” I answered “we have already paid you all we owe you & are nothing in arrears.” He answered that for the Peace we had paid him it was true, but to maintain the Peace we had given him nothing. I observed that the terms of our Treaty were to pay him the stipulated stores [and the] cash and in full of all demands forever…. The Pasha then observed that we had given a great deal to Algiers and Tunis…. he hoped the United States would [not] neglect him as six or eight vessels of the value of his would amount to a much larger sum than ever he expected to get from the United States for remaining at Peace.[24]

    Meanwhile, the U.S was quickly losing patience with the Barbary nations, and had been building up its Navy in preparation for armed confrontation. On May 15, 1801, President Thomas Jefferson’s cabinet again advised him to send a squadron to the Mediterranean, but only as a retaliatory force. On May 20, 1801, Commodore Richard Dale was commissioned to lead three frigates and a schooner to patrol the Mediterranean sea lanes. They set sail on June 2, 1801. However, unknown to Jefferson, the Pasha of Tripoli declared war against the United States on May 10, 1801.[24][25][26][27] In sending the Navy squadron to the Mediterranean, Jefferson declared,

    “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.”[28]

    Soon after Commodore Dale sailed into a neutral British port near the Straits of Gibraltar, he discovered that Tripoli had declared war on the United States. Commodore Dale’s commission only authorized him to blockade adversarial ports and capture hostile ships, so he could not attack Tripoli directly. However, he notified the Pasha of Tripoli that he could negotiate terms of surrender.

    Through subsequent battles, Tripoli eventually agreed to terms of peace with the United States. Tobias Lear negotiated a second “Treaty of Peace and Amity” with the Pasha Yusuf on June 4, 1805.[29] To the dismay of many Americans, the new settlement included a ransom of $60,000 paid for the release of prisoners from the USS Philadelphia and several U.S. merchant ships.

    By 1807, Algiers had gone back to taking U.S. ships and seamen hostage. Distracted by the preludes to the War of 1812, the United States was unable to respond to the provocations until 1815, with the Second Barbary War, thereby concluding the encompassing the First Barbary War and the Second Barbary War (1800–1815).

    It is two Presidents defamed by Obama.

    It’s okay to correct me if I’m wrong that he was dishonest about our Founders Adams and Jefferson.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »