BoatBanter.com - US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- ASA (https://www.boatbanter.com/asa/)

- - US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist. (https://www.boatbanter.com/asa/73433-us-sailors-learn-how-deal-muslim-fanatic-terrorist.html)

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

I found this interesting read from Michael G. Leventhal over the
dojgov.net. It gives an interesting historical perspective on our
current war on terror. It appears that dealing with the Muslim fanatics
has a long history in our Republic:

Terrorism and the New American Republic
In 1786, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson met with Arab diplomats from
Tunis, who were conducting terror raids and piracy against American
ships.

History records them as the Barbary Pirates. In fact, they were
blackmailing terrorists, hiding behind a self-serving interpretation of
their Islamic faith by embracing select tracts and ignoring others.
Borrowing from the Christian Crusades of centuries past, they used
history as a mandate for doing the western world one better. The
quisling European powers had been buying them off for years.

On March 28, 1786 Jefferson and Adams detailed what they saw as the
main issue:

"We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the Grounds
of their pretensions to make war upon a Nation 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. The Ambassador
answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, 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
who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise."

Thomas Jefferson wanted a military solution, but decades of
blackmailing the American Republic and enslaving its citizens would
continue until the new American nation realized that the only answer to
terrorism was force.

"There's a temptation to view all of our problems as unprecedented and
all of our threats as new and novel," says George Washington University
law professor Jonathan Turley. Shortly after the terror attacks of
Sept. 11, Turley advised some members of Congress who were considering
a formal declaration of war against the suspected perpetrators. He
invoked the precedent of the Barbary pirates, saying America had every
right to attack and destroy the terrorist leadership without declaring
war.

"Congress did not actually declare war on the pirates," Turley wrote in
a memo, "but 'authorized' the use of force against the regencies after
our bribes and ransoms were having no effect. This may have been due to
an appreciation that a declaration of war on such petty tyrants would
have elevated their status. Accordingly, they were treated as pirates
and, after a disgraceful period of accommodation, we hunted them down
as pirates."

Because of their outlaw conduct, pirates -- and modern-day terrorists
-- put themselves outside protection of the law, according to military
strategy expert Dave McIntyre, a former dean at the National War
College. "On the high seas if you saw a pirate, you sank the *******,"
he says. "You assault pirates, you don't arrest pirates."

Shoot first, ask questions later. Wanted: Dead or alive. Such is our
official policy regarding Osama bin Laden, the most infamous outlaw of
the era.

One of the enduring lessons of the Barbary campaigns was to never give
in to outlaws, whether you call them pirates or terrorists. In the late
1700s, America paid significant blackmail for peace -- shelling out
$990,000 to the Algerians alone at a time when national revenues
totaled just $7 million.

"Too many concessions have been made to Algiers," U.S. consul William
Eaton wrote to the Secretary of State in 1799. "There is but one
language which can be held to these people, and this is terror."

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

All correct... where's Bin Ladin? Ooops. Bush invaded Iraq instead of
dealing with the real threat. Saddam was a dictator who brutalized his
people, but he wasn't a threat to the US or his neighbors at that time. He
might have become a threat, but there was no need to split our effort. Did I
mention poppy/heroin production is back on track in Afganistan? I guess we
don't have enough troops to deal with that either.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Joe" wrote in message
ups.com...
I found this interesting read from Michael G. Leventhal over the
dojgov.net. It gives an interesting historical perspective on our
current war on terror. It appears that dealing with the Muslim fanatics
has a long history in our Republic:

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
All correct... where's Bin Ladin? Ooops. Bush invaded Iraq instead of
dealing with the real threat. Saddam was a dictator who brutalized his
people, but he wasn't a threat to the US or his neighbors at that time. He
might have become a threat, but there was no need to split our effort. Did
I mention poppy/heroin production is back on track in Afganistan? I guess
we don't have enough troops to deal with that either.

There seems to be some pretty good evidence now that Saddam was a
stabilizing influence in the Middle East, rather than the destabilizing
force we thought him to be. After Iran overtakes Iraq, the Muslim civil war
that will likely ensue should be a whopper.

Wonder if he'd like his old job back?

Max

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Saddam should be governor of New Jersey.

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Capt. JG wrote:
All correct... where's Bin Ladin? Ooops.

Well they let jarheads, and ground pounders go after him. They should
have sent the Navy. The battle of tora bora would have been named to
birth of the glass canyon had the Navy been asked to take out Ossama
there.

Bush invaded Iraq instead of
dealing with the real threat.

I thought we were doing both.

Saddam was a dictator who brutalized his
people, but he wasn't a threat to the US or his neighbors at that time. He
might have become a threat, but there was no need to split our effort.

Yes he was. He was a threat to the whole region.

You could argue that since Ossama was hiding is a rat hole out in the
middle of bum**** no-where he is not as much a treat as Saddam was at
the time. Face it Saddam and his FN physco family was a loose cannon
that had to be dealt with.

Did I
mention poppy/heroin production is back on track in Afganistan? I guess we
don't have enough troops to deal with that either.

WTF should we?

Joe

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Joe" wrote in message
ups.com...
I found this interesting read from Michael G. Leventhal over the
dojgov.net. It gives an interesting historical perspective on our
current war on terror. It appears that dealing with the Muslim fanatics
has a long history in our Republic:

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Jon,
You've given us "Moderates" another black eye. What's wrong with your
memory?

Have you forgotten the Kuwait War? Have you forgotten the UN rulings
given Iraq to stop the War? Has you forgotten the two "No Fly Zones"
set-up by the UN? Have you forgotten Saddam's misuse of "Medicines for
Oil"? Have you forgotten the 1000's of Rockets fired at UN Peace Keeping
Flights over the "NO FLY ZONES"?

How in the Hell can you say he was no threat? I don't agree with "George
2nd" handling of the situation but damn it, to not say he wasn't a
Threat is STUPIDITY.!!!

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
All correct... where's Bin Ladin? Ooops. Bush invaded Iraq instead of
dealing with the real threat. Saddam was a dictator who brutalized his
people, but he wasn't a threat to the US or his neighbors at that time. He
might have become a threat, but there was no need to split our effort. Did
I mention poppy/heroin production is back on track in Afganistan? I guess
we don't have enough troops to deal with that either.

There seems to be some pretty good evidence now that Saddam was a
stabilizing influence in the Middle East, rather than the destabilizing
force we thought him to be. After Iran overtakes Iraq, the Muslim civil war
that will likely ensue should be a whopper.

Wonder if he'd like his old job back?

He could always run for president (of Iraq) after he's found not
guilty.

--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

In article ,
Scotty wrote:

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
All correct... where's Bin Ladin? Ooops. Bush invaded Iraq
instead of
dealing with the real threat. Saddam was a dictator who
brutalized his
people, but he wasn't a threat to the US or his neighbors
at that time. He
might have become a threat, but there was no need to split
our effort. Did I
mention poppy/heroin production is back on track in
Afganistan?

No, you didn't. You also failed to mention who buys all that
heroin.

Sorry... we and the Europeans.

--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

In article .com,
Joe wrote:

Capt. JG wrote:
All correct... where's Bin Ladin? Ooops.

Well they let jarheads, and ground pounders go after him. They should
have sent the Navy. The battle of tora bora would have been named to
birth of the glass canyon had the Navy been asked to take out Ossama
there.

I like that... send in the Seals! :-)

Bush invaded Iraq instead of
dealing with the real threat.

I thought we were doing both.

So did I, but sadly we're not. Afganistan is also going down the
tubes.

Saddam was a dictator who brutalized his
people, but he wasn't a threat to the US or his neighbors at that time. He
might have become a threat, but there was no need to split our effort.

Yes he was. He was a threat to the whole region.

Actually, he was contained pretty well. That wouldn't have lasted
forever, but we had some time to work things out at a time of our own
choosing.

You could argue that since Ossama was hiding is a rat hole out in the
middle of bum**** no-where he is not as much a treat as Saddam was at
the time. Face it Saddam and his FN physco family was a loose cannon
that had to be dealt with.

I think recent events pretty much prove that his organization,
et. al., are still quite a threat.

Didn't have to deal with Saddam by Bushco lying to us about the threat.

Did I
mention poppy/heroin production is back on track in Afganistan? I guess we
don't have enough troops to deal with that either.

WTF should we?

No reason. I like heroin addicts.

--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

In article ,
Thom Stewart wrote:
Jon,
You've given us "Moderates" another black eye. What's wrong with your
memory?

What memory. Saddam was not a threat to us. Please demonstrate
otherwise.

Have you forgotten the Kuwait War? Have you forgotten the UN rulings
given Iraq to stop the War? Has you forgotten the two "No Fly Zones"
set-up by the UN? Have you forgotten Saddam's misuse of "Medicines for
Oil"? Have you forgotten the 1000's of Rockets fired at UN Peace Keeping
Flights over the "NO FLY ZONES"?

Beat him down, destroyed his ability to do it again. The No Fly Zones
were working fine. Medicine for oil money has nothing to do with a
threat to the US or anyone else. Never hit any plane with his "1000s"
of rockets. And, we could have dealt with that without killing 1000s
of our troops or invading.

How in the Hell can you say he was no threat? I don't agree with "George
2nd" handling of the situation but damn it, to not say he wasn't a
Threat is STUPIDITY.!!!

Wise up Thom. We were misled and now both Iraq and Afganistan are
going down the tubes.

--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Threat" is a codeword used by extremists to aDVANCE THEIR CAUSE.

The "environment" is threatened" cry the eco-wacko leftitsts.

Our "liberty" is "threatened" cry the right wing religo-nuts.

A threat has to be credible to be real.

Did Hussien possess a means to attack the US?

In his 20+ year reign did he ever attack the US?

Why would he threaten the US when we were on his side in the Iraq-Iran war?

Was Noriega in Panama a threat?

Castro was a bigger threat, he had atomic missiles in the 60's. North Korea
is a bigger threat. Iran is a bigger threat. Both have nukes and the stated
will to use them against the US.

Why don't we attack those threats?

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Gilligan wrote:

Why don't we attack those threats?

Well said Gilligan, We might as well dive in and open up a big can of
woop-ass on the fanatic blood thristy Sirian's and insane nuclear bomb
building Iran. And that crazy MF headed up N. Korea.

I noticed some democrat introduced new legislationl today that I hope
get passed by congress.
*****************************************
Congressman Charles Rangel today introduced new legislation to
reinstate the military draft that will include draftees up to 42 years
of
age.

"Every day that the military option is on the table, as declared
by
the President in his State of the Union address, in Iran, North Korea,
and
Syria, reinstatement of the military draft is an option that must also
be
considered, whether we like it or not," Congressman Rangel said. "If
the
military is already having trouble getting the recruits they need, what
can
we do to fill the ranks if the war spreads from Iraq to other
countries? We
may have no other choice but a draft."

The bill would mandate military service for men and women between
the
ages of 18 and 42. Deferments would be allowed only for completion of
high
school up to the age of 20, and for reasons of health, conscience or
religious belief. Recruits not needed by the military in any given
year
would be required to perform some national civilian service.

"My bill conforms to the age standards that have been set by the
Army
itself," Congressman Rangel said, referring to the Army's recent
announcement raising the top age for Army volunteers from 39 to 42.
"With
volunteers now being accepted up to the age of 42, it makes sense to
cap the
age of draftees at 42," Congressman Rangel said.

*******************************************
Seems like a fair deal for all, It would be nice to see some of the
biggest whiners, left wing losers, and rich spoiled rotten collage
boys having to serve. They might get a clue, if not killed by FF.

Joe

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

In article .com,
Joe wrote:

Gilligan wrote:

Why don't we attack those threats?

Well said Gilligan, We might as well dive in and open up a big can of
woop-ass on the fanatic blood thristy Sirian's and insane nuclear bomb
building Iran. And that crazy MF headed up N. Korea.

I noticed some democrat introduced new legislationl today that I hope
get passed by congress.
*****************************************
Congressman Charles Rangel today introduced new legislation to
reinstate the military draft that will include draftees up to 42 years
of
age.

Amazing.. I agree with all of this, and I'm a liberal!

Now, if I can just get Rumsfeld to stop calling liberals fascists for
disagreeing with Bushco.

I think we can do it all without invading.

--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ...
| In article .com,
| Joe wrote:
|
| Gilligan wrote:
|
| Why don't we attack those threats?
|
| Well said Gilligan, We might as well dive in and open up a big can of
| woop-ass on the fanatic blood thristy Sirian's and insane nuclear bomb
| building Iran. And that crazy MF headed up N. Korea.
|
| I noticed some democrat introduced new legislationl today that I hope
| get passed by congress.
| *****************************************
| Congressman Charles Rangel today introduced new legislation to
| reinstate the military draft that will include draftees up to 42 years
| of
| age.
|
| Amazing.. I agree with all of this, and I'm a liberal!
|
| Now, if I can just get Rumsfeld to stop calling liberals fascists for
| disagreeing with Bushco.
|
| I think we can do it all without invading.

Just ignore him, Joe. He's a net Nazi.

Paladin

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Gilligan" wrote in message
...
Saddam should be governor of New Jersey.

I was thinking more like Mayor of New Orleans.

Max

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

In article et,
Maxprop wrote:

"Gilligan" wrote in message
...
Saddam should be governor of New Jersey.

I was thinking more like Mayor of New Orleans.

We could use another Governor of California.

--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Jonathan Ganz wrote:
In article .com,
Joe wrote:

Gilligan wrote:

Why don't we attack those threats?

Well said Gilligan, We might as well dive in and open up a big can of
woop-ass on the fanatic blood thristy Sirian's and insane nuclear bomb
building Iran. And that crazy MF headed up N. Korea.

I noticed some democrat introduced new legislationl today that I hope
get passed by congress.
*****************************************
Congressman Charles Rangel today introduced new legislation to
reinstate the military draft that will include draftees up to 42 years
of
age.

Amazing.. I agree with all of this, and I'm a liberal!

Let me guess..... you're over 42?

Personally, I'd be happy if they raised the cutoff age to 50 and
lowered it to 15 :-) Both sexes of course. That'd take care of my kids
for a few years.....

PDW

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
All correct... where's Bin Ladin? Ooops. Bush invaded Iraq instead of
dealing with the real threat. Saddam was a dictator who brutalized his
people, but he wasn't a threat to the US or his neighbors at that time.
He might have become a threat, but there was no need to split our effort.
Did I mention poppy/heroin production is back on track in Afganistan? I
guess we don't have enough troops to deal with that either.

There seems to be some pretty good evidence now that Saddam was a
stabilizing influence in the Middle East, rather than the destabilizing
force we thought him to be. After Iran overtakes Iraq, the Muslim civil
war that will likely ensue should be a whopper.

Wonder if he'd like his old job back?

Max

There was pretty good evidence back in 1990 that Saddam was preferable to
the alternatives, credit to George I. Remember, when George II was asked if
he consulted his father re/invading Iraq and toppling the regime, he stated
that he consulted with his "other" father, his "earthly" father was probably
telling him that it was a huge mistake. War is peace.

John Cairns

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

In article . com,
Peter wrote:

Jonathan Ganz wrote:
In article .com,
Joe wrote:

Gilligan wrote:

Why don't we attack those threats?

Well said Gilligan, We might as well dive in and open up a big can of
woop-ass on the fanatic blood thristy Sirian's and insane nuclear bomb
building Iran. And that crazy MF headed up N. Korea.

I noticed some democrat introduced new legislationl today that I hope
get passed by congress.
*****************************************
Congressman Charles Rangel today introduced new legislation to
reinstate the military draft that will include draftees up to 42 years
of
age.

Amazing.. I agree with all of this, and I'm a liberal!

Let me guess..... you're over 42?

Personally, I'd be happy if they raised the cutoff age to 50 and
lowered it to 15 :-) Both sexes of course. That'd take care of my kids
for a few years.....

Heh... how did you guess. I agree. The age range should be
increased. No deferments for anyone in that age range. If you can't
serve in a military capacity, due to physical problems, other jobs
should be available.

--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Peter" wrote in message
ups.com...

Jonathan Ganz wrote:
In article .com,
Joe wrote:

Gilligan wrote:

Why don't we attack those threats?

Well said Gilligan, We might as well dive in and open up a big can of
woop-ass on the fanatic blood thristy Sirian's and insane nuclear bomb
building Iran. And that crazy MF headed up N. Korea.

I noticed some democrat introduced new legislationl today that I hope
get passed by congress.
*****************************************
Congressman Charles Rangel today introduced new legislation to
reinstate the military draft that will include draftees up to 42 years
of
age.

Amazing.. I agree with all of this, and I'm a liberal!

Let me guess..... you're over 42?

Personally, I'd be happy if they raised the cutoff age to 50 and
lowered it to 15 :-) Both sexes of course. That'd take care of my kids
for a few years.....

PDW

Raising the draft age won't get many more people. Most are fat, diabetic,
asthmatic, out of shape, whatever.

Atomic weapons are the most effective option.

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Gilligan" wrote in message
. ..

Atomic weapons are the most effective option.

Man made lava!

Glory!

BC

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

In article ,
Gilligan wrote:

Raising the draft age won't get many more people. Most are fat, diabetic,
asthmatic, out of shape, whatever.

True, but it might get them in better shape, and they can serve in
other ways besides by carrying weapons.

--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article et,
Maxprop wrote:

"Gilligan" wrote in message
...
Saddam should be governor of New Jersey.

I was thinking more like Mayor of New Orleans.

We could use another Governor of California.

Why? Isn't one enough for you guys?

Max

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Jon,

Would it be right for some foreign country (Muslin) to tell us how much
Corn we can grow? We can't tell them how much land can grow "Poppies"
anymore than we can tell Central American countries how much Cocoa they
can grow. It isn't OUR BUSINESS!

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"John Cairns" wrote in message
et...

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
All correct... where's Bin Ladin? Ooops. Bush invaded Iraq instead of
dealing with the real threat. Saddam was a dictator who brutalized his
people, but he wasn't a threat to the US or his neighbors at that time.
He might have become a threat, but there was no need to split our
effort. Did I mention poppy/heroin production is back on track in
Afganistan? I guess we don't have enough troops to deal with that
either.

There seems to be some pretty good evidence now that Saddam was a
stabilizing influence in the Middle East, rather than the destabilizing
force we thought him to be. After Iran overtakes Iraq, the Muslim civil
war that will likely ensue should be a whopper.

Wonder if he'd like his old job back?

Max

There was pretty good evidence back in 1990 that Saddam was preferable to
the alternatives, credit to George I. Remember, when George II was asked
if he consulted his father re/invading Iraq and toppling the regime, he
stated that he consulted with his "other" father, his "earthly" father was
probably telling him that it was a huge mistake. War is peace.

When one fails to listen to voices of reason, hindsight tends to be 20/20.

Max

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Joe wrote:
I found this interesting read from Michael G. Leventhal over the
dojgov.net. It gives an interesting historical perspective on our
current war on terror.

It is also mostly wrong. You'd think that a fine patriot
such as yourself would actually know enough US history to
spot the obvious errors.

Terrorism and the New American Republic
In 1786, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson met with Arab diplomats from
Tunis

No they didn't.

The rest is snipped as it is not comical enough to make the
funny pages and not serious enough to be worth repeating,
even to point out the mistakes (approx one per sentence).

DSK

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Gilligan wrote:

Saddam should be governor of New Jersey.

That would be cruel & unusual punishment. Besides, can a
ourt sentence him to that? I thought he had to be appointed
by the libby-rull elitist cabal?

DSK

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Sodomy Hussein?

"Gilligan" wrote in message
...
Saddam should be governor of New Jersey.

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

DSK wrote:
Joe wrote:
I found this interesting read from Michael G. Leventhal over the
dojgov.net. It gives an interesting historical perspective on our
current war on terror.

It is also mostly wrong. You'd think that a fine patriot
such as yourself would actually know enough US history to
spot the obvious errors.

Terrorism and the New American Republic
In 1786, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson met with Arab diplomats from
Tunis

No they didn't.

The rest is snipped as it is not comical enough to make the
funny pages and not serious enough to be worth repeating,
even to point out the mistakes (approx one per sentence).

DSK

Let's take a quick jaunt back to the 1780's, when T Jefferson and J
Adams, had to make a deal with the 'barbary' arab states, to get them
to
stop the jihad piracy.

Here's Dr Andrew Bostom's account:

Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, then serving as American ambassadors
to
France and Britain, respectively, met in 1786 in London with the
Tripolitan Ambassador to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja. These
future American presidents were attempting to negotiate a peace treaty
which would spare the United States the ravages of jihad
piracy-murder,
enslavement (with ransoming for redemption), and expropriation of
valuable commercial assets-emanating from the Barbary states (modern
Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya, known collectively in Arabic as
the Maghrib). During their discussions, they questioned Ambassador Adja

as to the source of the unprovoked animus directed at the nascent
United
States republic. Jefferson and Adams, in their subsequent report to the

Continental Congress, recorded the Tripolitan Ambassador's
justification:

... that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, 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
who
should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.

Thus as Joshua London's Victory in Tripoli elaborates in lucid prose,
an
aggressive jihad was already being waged against the United States
almost 200 years prior to America becoming a dominant international
power in the Middle East. Moreover, these jihad depredations targeting
America antedated the earliest vestiges of the Zionist movement by a
century, and the formal creation of Israel by 162 years-exploding the

ahistorical canard that American support for the modern Jewish state is

a prerequisite for jihadist attacks on the United States.

Jihad at Sea-An Overview

Barbary jihad piracy was merely a 16th through 19th century
manifestation of the naval razzias characteristic of Islamic
imperialism
since its emergence (pp.41-43) in the 7th and 8th centuries. For
example, although the Abbasid state (750-1250) "orientalized" the
Caliphate, and lacked naval power of any importance, in the west,
Muslim
forces (i.e., decentralized, "organic formations"), continued the
Islamic expansion by maritime warfare. Throughout the 9th and 10th
centuries, Berbers and Arabs from Spain and North Africa launched raids

along the coastal regions of France, Italy, Sicily, and in the Greek
archipelago.

Francisco Gabrieli has described how these naval razzias were
concordant
with jihad, yet antithetical to the modern rule of law. He also
emphasized their capacity for conquest, or, even when
"disorganized",
triumphal rapine and destruction:

According to present-day concepts of international relations, such
activities amounted to piracy, but they correspond perfectly to jihad,
an Islamic religious duty. The conquest of Crete, in the east, and a
good portion of the corsair warfare along the Provencal and Italian
coasts, in the West, are among the most conspicuous instances of such
"private initiative" which contributed to Arab domination in the
Mediterranean.

....In the second half of the ninth century, a large number of Saracen
(Muslim) raids occurred throughout Southern and Central Italy, but we
do
not get the impression of their ever having been part of a plan or
organized conquest, as Musa's, Tariq's, and Asad's campaigns had
been in
Spain and Sicily. Their only object seems to have been destruction and
looting which was also the object of the armed groups faced by Charles
on the Balat ash-Shuhada near Poitiers.

....The no less classical themes of Arabic war poetry, the hamasah
sanctified by jihad, ring out in the recollections and boasts of Ibn
Hamdis, the Sicilian Abu Firas, who exalts the military successes of
Islam on Calabrian soil, the landing of Muslim troops at Reggio and
their exploits against the patricians whom they cut to pieces or put to

flight.

A proto-typical Muslim naval razzia occurred in 846 when a fleet of
Arab
jihadists arrived at the mouth of the Tiber, made their way to Rome (p.

421), sacked the city, and carried away from the basilica of St. Peter
all of the gold and silver it contained. But perhaps the largest and
most infamous of the naval jihad campaigns during this period was the
sack and pillage of Thessaloniki in 904. During July, 904, under the
command of the Muslim convert Leo of Tripoli, more than ten thousand
Cretan Arabs, Syrians, and North Africans briefly sieged, and then
captured Thessaloniki, slaughtering and enslaving its inhabitants (some

22,000 slaves were taken), and causing great physical destruction to
the
city. John Cameniates provided an eyewitness account of these events,
recorded in his chronicle. Cameniates, his elderly father, and his
brother, taken prisoner while they tried to escape by the ramparts,
were
spared their lives because they promised their captors a large amount
of
money. They were marched as prisoners through the city, and thus
witnessed the terrible carnage of their fellow townspeople. Cameniates
narrative reveals that (p. 604):

The Thessalonians tried to escape through the streets, pursued by the
Saracens, who were unleashed like wild beasts. In their panic, men.
women, the elderly, and children, fell into each other's arms to give

each other one last kiss. The enemy hit with no mercy. Parents were
killed while trying to defend their children. No one was spared: women,

children, the elderly, all were immediately pierced by the sword. The
poor wretches ran through the town, or tried to hide inside the caves;
some of them, believing they could find refuge inside a church, would
seek shelter inside, while others tried to scale the walls of the
ramparts, from where they jumped into the void and crashed to the
ground. Nuns, petrified with fear, with their hair disheveled, tried to

escape, and ended up by the thousands in the hands of the barbarians,
who killed the older ones, and sent the younger and more attractive
ones
into captivity and dishonor... The Saracens also massacred the
unfortunate
people who had sought refuge inside churches.

Halil Inalcik has placed the 14th century Aegean sea naval razzias of
the Turkish maritime emirates in the context of jihad, citing, for
example, the chapter of the Dusturname of Enveri concerning the actions

of the emirate of Aydin. Elizabeth Zachariadou describes the
consternation of contemporary 14th century Latin and Byzantine
chroniclers observing the "spectacle" of Turkish emirs, "...who
were proud
only because they were able to lead their ferocious soldiers" in such

predatory attacks. These raids-designed to pillage property and
abduct
captives for sale in slave markets-although merely ignoble piracy or
brigandage from the perspective of the Christian chroniclers,
nevertheless, as Zachariadou notes, were,

....for the Muslim Turks, a Holy War (Jihad), a praiseworthy and
legitimate
occupation, leading directly to Paradise.

Gregory Palamus, a Metropolitan of Thessalonica during the 14th
century,
wrote this commentary while living as a captive amongst the Turks in
1354, confirming (albeit with astonishment) that indeed the Turks
attributed their victories over the Byzantines to their (the Muslims)
love of God:

For these impious people, hated by God and infamous, boast of having
got
the better of the Romans by their love of God...they live by the bow,
the
sword and debauchery, finding pleasure in taking slaves, devoting
themselves to murder, pillage, spoil...and not only do they commit
these
crimes, but even-what an aberration-they believe that God approves
of
them. This is what I think of them, now that I know precisely about
their way of life.

More than 650 years later, and a continent (and oceans) away, C. Snouck

Hurgronje reported (in 1906) that similar acts of jihad piracy were
still being performed against non-Muslims (both indigenous populations,

and Western traders) by the Muslim Acehnese of the Indonesian
archipelago:

From Mohammedanism (which for centuries she [i.e., Aceh] is reputed to

have accepted) she really only learnt a large number of dogmas relating

to hatred of the infidel without any of their mitigating concomitants;
so the Acehnese made a regular business of piracy and man-hunting at
the
expense of the neighboring non-Mohammedan countries and islands, and
considered that they were justified in any act of treachery or violence

to European (and latterly to American) traders who came in search of
pepper, the staple product of the country. Complaints of robbery and
murder on board ships trading in Acehnese parts thus grew to be
chronic.

Jihad Piracy and the Barbary States

The Barbary jihad piracy which confronted America soon after our nation

was established (i.e., between 1786-1815), was an enduring, formidable

enterprise. During the 16th and 17th centuries, as many Europeans were
captured, sold, and enslaved by the Barbary corsairs as were West
Africans made captive and shipped for plantation labor in the Americas
by European slave traders. Robert Davis' methodical enumeration
indicates that between one, and one and one-quarter million white
European Christians were enslaved by the Barbary Muslims from 1530
through 1780. White Gold, Giles Milton's remarkable account of
Cornish
cabin boy Thomas Pellow, captured by Barbary corsairs in 1716, also
documents how earlier 17th century jihad razzias had extended to
England
[p. 13, "By the end of the dreadful summer of 1625, the mayor of
Plymouth reckoned that 1,000 skiffs had been destroyed, and a similar
number of villagers carried off into slavery"], Wales, southern
Ireland
[p.16, "In 1631...200 Islamic soldiers...sailed to the village of
Baltimore,
storming ashore with swords drawn and catching the villagers totally by

surprise. (They) carried off 237 men, women, and children and took them

to Algiers...The French padre Pierre Dan was in the city (Algiers) at
the
time...He witnessed the sale of the captives in the slave auction.
'It was
a pitiful sight to see them exposed in the market...Women were
separated
from their husbands and the children from their fathers...on one side a

husband was sold; on the other his wife; and her daughter was torn from

her arms without the hope that they'd ever see each other
again'."], and
even Reykjavik, Iceland!

Alberto Guglielmotti (vol. 3, La Guerra dei Pirati, 1500-1560) included

this description of the severe commercial and social devastation
wrought
upon the Mediterranean littoral of southern Europe by these jihad
razzias (English translation, p. 24):

Everyone...could see with their own eyes the desolation of the Spanish,

French, and Italian coasts, thanks to the pertinacious infestation of
these pirates: the wretched beaches, the abandoned islands, the shacks
[reduced to] ashes, the fishermen in flight, and the vessels of the
Barbarian rovers loitering about on the sea.

And the epigraph from Padre Biaggio di Turena which introduces Davis'

recent monograph (p. xxiv) on Barbary slavery, depicts the plight of
the
captives:

In twenty years of wearisome work as a missionary in Aleppo, Baghdad,
Grand Cairo, and Suez on the Red Sea, I have seen the infinite miseries

of the poor Christians oppressed by the barbarian cruelty of
Mohammedans.

America and the Barbary Jihadists

Joshua London's compelling narrative of America's political and
military
efforts during the Barbary wars highlights-appositely-the
experiences of
William Eaton. Eaton's triumphs and travails during his tenure as
consul
to Tunis (1799-1803), and later U.S. naval agent to the Barbary states,

mirrored those of the young American nation he served.

Born on February 23, 1764 in Woodstock, Connecticut, the highly
intelligent and strong-willed Eaton, when 16 years old, ran away from
home, subsequently lying about his age to join Washington's Continental

Army. He rose to the rank of sergeant in the Continental Army, which he

served until 1783. Eaton graduated Dartmouth in 1790, and in 1791 was
chosen clerk of the Massachusetts House of Delegates, where he remained

until 1797, while he also served (beginning in 1792) the U.S. Army as
both a fighter and negotiator during the frontier campaigns against the

American Indians. Later, Eaton assisted then Secretary of War Timothy
Pickering's espionage/treason investigations. When Pickering became
Secretary of State, he chose Eaton to serve as U.S. consul to Tunis,
initially under President John Adams.

Eaton's consular journal (reproduced by London, on p. 63) recorded
these
brutally honest and comical impressions of his first diplomatic
encounter (on February 22, 1799) with Dey Bobba Mustafa of Algiers,
which would make the craven State Department mandarins of today, wince:

....we took off our shoes and entering the cave (for so it seemed), with

small apertures of light with iron gates, we were shown to a huge,
shaggy beast, sitting on his rump upon a low bench covered with a
cushion of embroidered velvet, with his hind legs gathered up like a
tailor, or a bear. On our approach to him, he reached out his forepaw
as
if to receive something to eat. Our guide exclaimed, "Kiss the
Dey's
hand!" The consul general bowed very elegantly, and kissed it, and we

followed his example in succession. The animal seemed at that moment to

be in a harmless mode; he grinned several times, but made very little
noise. Having performed this ceremony, and standing a few moments in
silent agony, we had leave to take our shoes and other property, and
leave the den without any other injury than the humility of being
obliged in this involuntary manner, to violate the second commandment
of
God and offend common decency. Can any man believe that this elevated
brute has seven kings of Europe, two republics, and a continent
tributary to him when his whole naval force is not equal to two
line-of-battle ships? It is so.

Despite such inauspicious beginnings, and the institutionalized Barbary

corruption Eaton found so repugnant to his person, and nation, his
negotiations eventually secured U.S. commercial interests (at least a
temporary) immunity from the attacks of Tunisian corsairs.

Eaton agonized over the gulf between the enormous potential and
depressing reality of the Barbary states. He admired the Mediterranean
coast of Tunis, "...naturally luxuriant and beautiful beyond
description...I
know not why it might not vie with the opposite continent in every
thing
useful, rich, and elegant", yet despaired of the stultifying
religio-political institutions which arrested the regions progress.
Ultimately, Eaton concluded that Islam itself, certainly as practiced
in
Barbary, was the source of this backwardness:

Considered as a nation, they are deplorably wretched, because they have

no property in the soil to inspire an ambition to cultivate it. They
are
abject slaves to the despotism of their government, and they are
humiliated by tyranny, the worst of all tyrannies, the despotism of
priestcraft. They live in more solemn fear of the frowns of a bigot who

has been dead and rotten above a thousand years, than of the living
despot whose frown would cost them their lives...The ignorance,
superstitious tradition and civil and religious tyranny, which depress
the human mind here, exclude improvement of every kind...

[A century later (1899), based upon his experiences as a young officer
in the Sudan, Winston Churchill* would draw remarkably similar
conclusions about the impact of Islam in "The River War"]

But Eaton also possessed the intellectual honesty to acknowledge that
the cruelty of the Barbary slavery he witnessed was "...but a copy of
the
very barbarity which my eyes have seen in my own country. And yet we
boast of liberty and national justice."

Appointed Naval Agent for the Barbary Regencies in 1804, Eaton then
organized and led an expedition to unseat the predatory Barbary ruler
Yusuf Qaramanli. Eaton's army arrived outside Derna. on April 25,
1805.
When the bey of Derna refused his generous ultimatum, at 2 p.m. April
28, Eaton led a successful attack on the city, supported by U.S. naval
gunfire. During the fighting Eaton-who had led his outnumbered force
in
a gallant bayonet charge-was wounded in the left wrist. As London
recounts:

He simply wrapped his arm in a makeshift bandage and sling, grabbed a
pistol with his right hand, and continued to charge ahead. With the
American Marines in the lead, Eaton's forces stormed the ramparts and

advanced straight to the harbor.

Subsequent diplomatic efforts stalled the expedition. Tobias Lear, the

Consul General, reached an accomodation with Yusuf Qaramanli, which
included ransom money for all American prisoners, the withdrawal of
U.S.
forces from Derna, and the betrayal of Eaton's key Arab ally, Ahmad
Qaramanli. Eaton commented upon this treaty with predictable bitterness

in a letter to Commodore John Rodgers:

Could I have apprehended this result of my exertions, certainly no
consideration would have prevailed on me to have taken an agency in a
tragedy so manifestly fraught with intrigue, so wounding to human
feelings, and, as I must view it, so degrading to our national honor.

Although the Senate ratified the Tripoli treaty in April 1806 by a vote

of 21 to 8, as London notes,

Jefferson declared 'victory,' but the 'peace' proved rather
political...The Federalists did not manage to derail the treaty, but
they
did embarrass and, at junctures, discredit President Thomas Jefferson
and forever tarnish the career of Tobias Lear.

Just over five years later, in Brimfield, Massachusetts, June 1, 1811,
an alcoholic forty-seven year old William Eaton died in near anonymity.

The signing of the Treaty of Ghent (Christmas eve, 1814)-subsequently

ratified in the U.S. (February, 1815)-ended the so-called War of 1812

with Great Britain, and allowed President James Madison to address the
problem of renewed Barbary jihad terrorism. On February 23, 1815,
Madison provided this written assessment of the matter to a closed
session of Congress:

Congress will have seen, by the communication from the Consul General
of
the United States, at Algiers, ...the hostile proceedings of the Dey
against that functionary. These have been followed by acts of more
overt
and direct warfare against the citizens of the United States trading in

the Mediterranean, some of whom are still detained in captivity,
notwithstanding the attempts which have been made to ransom them, and
they are treated with the rigor usual on the coast of Barbary...The
considerations which rendered it unnecessary and unimportant to
commerce
hostile operations on the part of the United States, being now
terminated by the peace with Great Britain, which opens the prospect of

an active and valuable trade of their citizens within the range of the
Algerine cruisers; I recommend to Congress the expediency of an act
declaring the existence of a state of war between the United States and

the Dey and Regency of Algiers; and of such provisions as may be
requisite for a vigorous prosecution of it to a successful issue.

Shortly afterward, President Madison commissioned two naval squadrons
led by Commodores William Bainbridge and Stephen Decatur, and
dispatched
them to the Barbary States in May, 1815. By June/July 1815 the ably
commanded U.S. naval forces had dealt their Barbary jihadist
adversaries
a quick series of crushing defeats. These U.S. victories were
solidified
by what London terms "unprecedented" treaty agreements forced upon
the
Barbary states, which "..made practically no concessions and stood
very
firm on every point"-the abolition of all tribute; release of all
American prisoners currently held, and acknowledgement that no future
American prisoners of war could be enslaved; the payment of
indemnities;
and the restoration of American properties held by the dey.

Joshua London concludes his engrossing, carefully researched, and
intellectually honest account of the Barbary wars with this insightful
analysis:

During the war with Tripoli, the United States began to test William
Eaton's hypothesis that fighting back and protecting the national
honor
and national interest with force was the best way to end Barbary
piracy.
Just at the moment of triumph, however, President Thomas Jefferson
wavered and settled on the side of expediency. Jefferson's lack of
resolve left American interests unguarded, and once again American
maritime trade felt the Barbary terror. By 1816, however, the United
States finally provded that William Eaton was right. This success
ignited the imagination of the Old World powers to rise up against the
Barbary pirates.

Where is Our William Eaton (or John Quincy Adams)?

Shortly after the cataclysmic jihad terror attacks of 9/11/01,
President
George W. Bush made his now infamous utterance that Islam is a
"religion
of peace". Ironically, the renowned 20th century Muslim ideologue
Sayyid
Qutb, perhaps the most brilliant Muslim scholar of the 20th century,
who
is demonized as a fomenter of "radical" Islam, has also referred to

Islam as a "religion of peace". But Qutb's context is
unapologetic and
clear-he is referring to the Pax Islamica that would prevail when the

entire world was submitted to Islamic domination, and the rule of
Islamic law (i.e., the Shari'a), by jihad war.

President Bush further insisted in a more recent speech that the
"ideology" of the most notable Muslim terrorists, who he maintained

"distort the idea of jihad", is "very different from the
religion of
Islam", and indeed "exploits Islam to serve a violent, political
vision." The President's specific and assertive comments regarding
jihad were a profound disappointment. Indeed, such words could have
been
written and spoken by the most uninformed, or deliberately disingenuous

apologists for this devastating, and uniquely Islamic institution, well

over a millennium old, and still wreaking havoc today.

In stark contrast, John Quincy Adams, who made seminal contributions to

the formulation of U.S. foreign policy, possessed a remarkably clear,
uncompromised understanding of the permanent Islamic institution of
jihad war, and its corollary institution, dhimmitude. Regarding jihad,
Adams, in his essay series dealing with the Russo-Turkish War, and on
Greece, (written while JQA was in retirement, before his election to
Congress in 1830, Chapters X-XIV [pp. 267-402] in The American Annual
Register for 1827-28-29. New York, 1830), states,

....he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a
part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind...The precept of
the
Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the
prophet of God...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.

And Adams captured the essential condition imposed upon the non-Muslim
dhimmi "tributaries" subjugated by jihad, with this laconic
statement,

The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute.

Joshua London's elegant analysis of America's first war against
jihad
terrorism illustrates the pitfalls of ignoring basic Islamic
precepts-rooted in jihad-such as Dar al Harb, as stated ad nauseum
by
our Muslim adversaries, past and present. It is critical that current
U.S. political leadership rediscover and imbibe the uncompromised
knowledge of Islam possessed by John Quincy Adams, and the outspoken,
tragic hero of the Barbary jihad wars, William Eaton.

During Eaton's 1798 voyage to North Africa to serve as the consul to
Tunis, he lamented in his journal,

It is sad to reflect that our beloved nation could sink so low in her
self-esteem [as to pay such lavish tribute to pirates]. I pray that I
will have an opportunity to cause the rulers of Barbary to think more
highly of us in years to come

Eaton subsequently warned the political elites and ordinary countrymen
of his time that,

Our language to them [the Barbary jihadist states] should be the
language of the gospel:

'I have set this day before you life and death, choose which you
will'.
Without a language like this, and an attitude to support it, to think
of
reciprocity is idle...

The epigraph to Victory in Tripoli was also written by William Eaton.
Two centuries later, these words are a fitting epilogue to the Barbary
wars, as America struggles against contemporary jihad terrorism,
triumphally resurgent:

To the United States, they believe they can dictate terms. Why should
they not? Or why should they believe it will ever be otherwise? They
have seen nothing in America to controvert the opinion. And all our
talk
of resistance and reprisal, they view as the swaggering of a
braggadocio...But whatever stratagem may be used to aid our measures,
it
is certain, that there is not access to the permanent friendship of
these states, without paving the way with gold or cannon balls; and the

proper question is, which method is preferable.

Hope springs eternal that politicians or diplomats possessed of William

Eaton's and John Quincy Adams' learning, experiential wisdom, and
moral
clarity will step forward and admonish Americans so forthrightly today.

[*Sir Winston Churchill, The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages
248-50, London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899]

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!
Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as
hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The
effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly
systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of

property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live....A
degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the

next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every

woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a
child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of
slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among
men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities ...but the
influence
of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow
it.
No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being
moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has
already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at
every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the
strong
arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the

civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of
ancient Rome.

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Joe,

The most important event in American history, which precipated the attacks
on the Barbary Pirates, was the dealing with the Pirates of Penzance. I
suggest you review your American history.

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Gilligan" wrote in message . ..
| Joe,
|
| The most important event in American history, which precipated the attacks
| on the Barbary Pirates, was the dealing with the Pirates of Penzance. I
| suggest you review your American history.
|

I disagree! I think the most important event in American history was
the election of one Ronald Reagan. Without his dealing with and
defeating the Soviet Union, the United States might well be nuclear
slag right now.

Paladin

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Paladin" noneofyourbusiness.www wrote in message
...

"Gilligan" wrote in message
. ..
| Joe,
|
| The most important event in American history, which precipated the
attacks
| on the Barbary Pirates, was the dealing with the Pirates of Penzance. I
| suggest you review your American history.
|

I disagree! I think the most important event in American history was
the election of one Ronald Reagan. Without his dealing with and
defeating the Soviet Union, the United States might well be nuclear
slag right now.

Ronald Reagan would have never been elected if not for the candicy of Barry
M. Goldwater. Goldwater would have used atomic weapons against the Pirates
of Penzance!

Through purity of essence, we would prevail!

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Joe wrote:
Let's take a quick jaunt back to the 1780's, when T Jefferson and J
Adams, had to make a deal with the 'barbary' arab states, to get them
to
stop the jihad piracy.

Here's Dr Andrew Bostom's account:

Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, then serving as American ambassadors
to
France and Britain, respectively, met in 1786 in London with the
Tripolitan Ambassador to Britain

Utter and complete bull****

This is not only a fabrication, but is so far askew from
anything that is actual history as to make me wonder why
anybody who passed U.S. history in grammar school would
believe it for a second.

First of all, was Tripoli a sovereign country? Did the
country that we know as "Tripoli" have ambassadors in
European capitals?

If the above was true, would that ambassador have a meeting
with other ambassadors to announce that his gov't was going
to carry out piratical attacks against merchant shipping?

Try googling this phrase: "Dey of Algiers chopping down U.S.
flag pole".

Basically, this kind of farce is being used to try to sell a
bill of goods to the gullible & prejudiced. It's
advertising, like glamour shots of the "Pepsi generation,"
intended to justify & popularize unwise & impractical gov't
policy. It is a jihad of ignorance.

DSK

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Gilly,

Not sure but I think the "Barbary Pirates" proceeded Victor's "Pirates
of Penzance". I also believe they were English rather than American.

They were easily dealt with by just putting new words to old tunes.

Never a problem for me. Just JOY!

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Paladin wrote:
"Gilligan" wrote in message . ..
| Joe,
|
| The most important event in American history, which precipated the attacks
| on the Barbary Pirates, was the dealing with the Pirates of Penzance. I
| suggest you review your American history.
|

I disagree! I think the most important event in American history was
the election of one Ronald Reagan. Without his dealing with and
defeating the Soviet Union, the United States might well be nuclear
slag right now.

Paladin

Check out your post office.
I just got a whole sheet of the new Ronald Regan stamps TODAY!
http://www.politics-now.com/gifs/news/reagan2.jpg
I can't wait to pay my bills now.

Joe

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

Paladin,

I hate like Hell to disagree with you again but the most important thing
in Ronnie's Admin, was being shot with a 22 instead of a 38.

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Joe" wrote in message oups.com...
|
| Paladin wrote:
| "Gilligan" wrote in message . ..
| | Joe,
| |
| | The most important event in American history, which precipated the attacks
| | on the Barbary Pirates, was the dealing with the Pirates of Penzance. I
| | suggest you review your American history.
| |
|
|
| I disagree! I think the most important event in American history was
| the election of one Ronald Reagan. Without his dealing with and
| defeating the Soviet Union, the United States might well be nuclear
| slag right now.
|
| Paladin
|
| Check out your post office.
| I just got a whole sheet of the new Ronald Regan stamps TODAY!
| http://www.politics-now.com/gifs/news/reagan2.jpg
| I can't wait to pay my bills now.
|
| Joe

Excellent! Sure beats the Clinton stamp.

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/...nton_stamp.jpg

Paladin

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message ...
| Paladin,
|
| I hate like Hell to disagree with you again but the most important thing
| in Ronnie's Admin, was being shot with a 22 instead of a 38.

Ronnie? Wasn't he somebody on the "Leave it to Beaver" show?

Paladin

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

US Sailors learn how to deal with the Muslim Fanatic Terrorist.

"Paladin" noneofyourbusiness.www wrote in message
...

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
| Paladin,
|
| I hate like Hell to disagree with you again but the most important thing
| in Ronnie's Admin, was being shot with a 22 instead of a 38.

Ronnie? Wasn't he somebody on the "Leave it to Beaver" show?

Paladin

Barbara Billingsley: "Gee Ward, I think you were a bit too hard on the
beaver last night"