Author Topic: Jefferson’s Quran  (Read 2697 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline azrom

  • Senior JTFer
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Jefferson’s Quran
« on: January 27, 2007, 07:55:42 PM »
It was quite witty of Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., to short-circuit the hostility of those who criticized him for taking his oath on the Quran and to ask the Library of Congress for the loan of Thomas Jefferson’s copy of that holy book. But the irony of this, which certainly made his stupid Christian fundamentalist critics look even stupider, ought to be partly at his own expense as well.

In the first place, concern over Ellison’s political and religious background has little to do with his formal adherence to Islam. In his student days and subsequently, he was a supporter of Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam, a racist and crackpot cult organization that is in schism with the Muslim faith and even with the Sunni orthodoxy now preached by the son of the NOI’s popularizer Elijah Muhammad. Farrakhan’s sect explicitly describes a large part of the human species—the so-called white part—as an invention of the devil and has issued tirades against the Jews that exceed what even the most fanatical Islamists have said. Farrakhan himself has boasted of the “punishment” meted out to Malcolm X by armed gangsters of the NOI (see the brilliant documentary Brother Minister: The Assassination of Malcolm X, which catches him in the act of doing this). If Ellison now wants to use his faith to justify an appeal to pluralism and inclusiveness and diversity, he needs to repudiate the Nation of Islam, and in much more unambivalent terms than any I have yet heard from him.

As to the invocation of Jefferson, we know that when he and James Madison first proposed the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom (the frame and basis of the later First Amendment to the Constitution) in 1779, the preamble began, “Well aware that Almighty God hath created the mind free.” Patrick Henry and other devout Christians attempted to substitute the words “Jesus Christ” for “Almighty God” in this opening passage and were overwhelmingly voted down. This vote was interpreted by Jefferson to mean that Virginia’s representatives wanted the law “to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahomedan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.” Quite right, too, and so far so good, even if the term Mahomedan would not be used today, and even if Jefferson’s own private sympathies were with the last named in that list.

A few years later, in 1786, the new United States found that it was having to deal very directly with the tenets of the Muslim religion. The Barbary states of North Africa (or, if you prefer, the North African provinces of the Ottoman Empire, plus Morocco) were using the ports of today’s Algeria, Libya, and Tunisia to wage a war of piracy and enslavement against all shipping that passed through the Strait of Gibraltar. Thousands of vessels were taken, and more than a million Europeans and Americans sold into slavery. The fledgling United States of America was in an especially difficult position, having forfeited the protection of the British Royal Navy. Under this pressure, Congress gave assent to the Treaty of Tripoli, negotiated by Jefferson’s friend Joel Barlow, which stated roundly that “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 Musselmen.” This has often been taken as a secular affirmation, which it probably was, but the difficulty for secularists is that it also attempted to buy off the Muslim pirates by the payment of tribute. That this might not be so easy was discovered by Jefferson and John Adams when they went to call on Tripoli’s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. They asked him by what right he extorted money and took slaves in this way. As Jefferson later reported to Secretary of State John Jay, and to the Congress:

The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered 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 Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.
Medieval as it is, this has a modern ring to it. Abdrahaman did not fail to add that a commission paid directly to Tripoli—and another paid to himself—would secure some temporary lenience. I believe on the evidence that it was at this moment that Jefferson decided to make war on the Muslim states of North Africa as soon as the opportunity presented itself. And, even if I am wrong, we can be sure that the dispatch of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps to the Barbary shore was the first and most important act of his presidency. It took several years of bombardment before the practice of kidnap and piracy and slavery was put down, but put down it was, Quranic justification or not.

{snip}

http://www.slate.com/id/2157314/fr/flyout
"Negroes are a form of animal and it is against the will of God and nature to mate with such creatures. It is specifically forbidden in the Holy Bible. The Negro is still in the ape stage, actually a higher form of gorilla. They are retarded, 200,000 years behind the white race. They suffer from sickle-cell trait, a hereditary racial characteristic of negroes, and is found in no other race - Negroes have diseased blood". - Prof. Charles Carroll

Offline MassuhDGoodName

  • Ultimate JTFer
  • *******
  • Posts: 4542
Re: Jefferson’s Quran
« Reply #1 on: January 28, 2007, 08:28:46 AM »
Christopher Hitchens' Slate article which is linked in the post, is well written and informative, yet another example of Hitchens' viciously snide and elitist anti-Jew perspective.

Simply click on the link and continue reading the rest of the article, in which Hitchens thoroughly insults Torah as well as the Christian New Testament.

Having already introduced his view of the Christian Fundamentalists who oppose Keith Ellison as "...more stupid than they already are...", he then refers to any actual belief in Ha'Shem as "...puerile..." (boyish, immature).

He concludes by slamming every accurately written account in Torah of our Jewish history as "...superstition...and myth..."; as he insists that detractors of Ellison should be forced to swear on the Jefferson Bible (Jefferson's view of the New Testament with no mention of Divinity, miracles, or Torah metaphysics, due to his excising with a razor anything which he personally found distasteful), and then cleverly slams Bush for choosing, unlike Jefferson, to "remake" a Medieval Islamic state rather than simply defeat it and leave.

I personally have written Hitchens several times over the years from 2000 to present, calling him the dirtbag of degenerate elitist scum he is, because of his numerous prior articles supporting Arafat & PLO, his praise for suicide bombers, his excusing the murder of Jewish women and children by fostering the Marxist lie that Muslims are terrorists because the Jews are depriving them of their "human rights", etc... .

I am sure the post is very well intentioned.  However, I believe that linking to the editorials of a confirmed Jew-Hater and Internationalist such as Christopher Hitchens, if done at all, should be done with a disclaimer to make JTF readers aware of "Mr." Hitchens' evil agenda.

Offline Starcatcher099

  • New JTFer
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Jefferson’s Quran
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2007, 07:58:13 PM »
I think you missed the true Irony:) >>"Too long, for the honor of nations, have those Barbarians [Muslims] been permitted to trample on the sacred faith of treaties, on the rights and laws of human nature!"
-Thomas Jefferson