Forgive me.
I looked into the archives, and it appears the State Department of the United State has deleted this history.
Likewise, the links to most sources which describe the meeting between our second and third presidents, and what they were told by Tripoli's ambassador, have also been scrubbed from the internet.
View attachment 1156525
Jefferson Versus the Muslim Pirates
Christopher Hitchens
America’s first confrontation with the Islamic world helped forge a new nation’s character.
". . . One of the historians of the Barbary conflict, Frank Lambert, argues that the imperative of free trade drove America much more than did any quarrel with Islam or “tyranny,” let alone “terrorism.” He resists any comparison with today’s tormenting confrontations. “The Barbary Wars were primarily about trade, not theology,” he writes. “Rather than being holy wars, they were an extension of America’s War of Independence.”
Let us not call this view reductionist. Jefferson would perhaps have been just as eager to send a squadron to put down any Christian piracy that was restraining commerce. But one cannot get around what Jefferson heard when he went with John Adams to wait upon Tripoli’s ambassador to London in March 1785. When they inquired by what right the Barbary states preyed upon American shipping, enslaving both crews and passengers, America’s two foremost envoys were informed that “it was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.” (It is worth noting that the United States played no part in the Crusades, or in the Catholic reconquista of Andalusia.)
Ambassador Abd Al-Rahman did not fail to mention the size of his own commission, if America chose to pay the protection money demanded as an alternative to piracy. So here was an early instance of the “heads I win, tails you lose” dilemma, in which the United States is faced with corrupt regimes, on the one hand, and Islamic militants, on the other—or indeed a collusion between them. . . . "
But the point here is still the same. Our founders were well aware of the justification by which Islamic governments claimed to victimize non-Islamic ones.
None the less. . . if Muslim immigration is kept to only H1-Bs in this nation, which I support, and disallows mass migration of refugees from these nations, which given what we see going on in Europe? We would probably be wise to do. Then we will be just fine.
www.newsweek.com
1776history.com
