Article by Grace Powers
When Frederic Bartholdi unveiled his colossal sculpture of the Statue of Liberty in 1886, spectators wanted to know who the masculine-featured diva was that served as his model. Was she his mother? His wife? His mistress, perhaps? Some speculated that she was the Egyptian goddess Isis, Mary Magdalene or the Biblical Whore of Babylon.
Others argued that Lady Liberty wasn’t a lady at all, but a man in drag. Bartholdi took the secret of her identity to his grave....but he left behind evidence.
HER BODY
Bartholdi shamelessly copied three designs from other sculptors for his American monument - one for her body, one for her pedestal and another for her head. His first copied design was the Colossus of Rhodes built in 304 BC as a celebration of freedom. Like the statue of liberty, it rose to the same height from head to toe and loomed over the entrance to another busy harbor on the island of Rhodes. The Statue of Liberty’s radiating crown with its seven giant sun-ray spikes is a carbon copy of the Rhodian sculpture built in honor of the Sun God, Helios. His seven rays symbolized the seven seas and seven continents over which he ruled. It took twelve years for the sculptor, Chares of Lindos, to build his giant ‘wonder of the ancient world’. Fifty-six years later, the island of Rhodes was struck by a violent earthquake that shook the giant off his feet and cast him down like a child’s toy into a broken and ruined heap.
HER PEDESTAL
To build the pedestal, stairway, observation deck and torch, Bartholdi copied another ‘wonder of the ancient world’ - the four hundred foot tall Pharos lighthouse of Alexandria, Egypt which had been commissioned by Ptolemy I, in 290BC. Tourists could climb up to the observation platform at the first le vel and continue climbing to the very top of the tower where a smaller balcony showcased the breathtaking panorama of sea and sky. For 1500 years, it stood on Egypt’s island of Pharos in Alexandria Harbor. The multiple mirrors at the top of the lighthouse reflected sunlight during the day. At night, its leaping flames licked the star studded sky and guided seafarers into Alexandria harbor.
HER HEAD
To create his American Statue, Bartholdi used the same mystery woman that he had sketched for his failed Egyptian statue.
THE FAME
Investigative reporters in America had a reputation for digging up dirt on people. Bartholdi feared they would dig up his dirty little secret that the Statue of Liberty was a recycled version of his failed Egyptian statue. To cover up the truth, he altered the robe and hairstyle on his American statue and added spiked rays emanating from her crown like the Colossus of Rhodes.
Bartholdi built a four-foot clay miniature model first, then a complete nine foot tall (2.85 meters) cast in plaster, followed by four more proportional enlargements until it had grown to one-fourth the size of his planned masterpiece. With each increase in size, nine thousand mathematical calculations and measurements had to be painstakingly made.
Freemason Gustave Eiffel designed and engineered the intricate skeleton for the statue using four gigantic steel supports as the main structural framework. Eiffel’s claim to fame was his phallic 984-foot tall Eiffel Tower of iron and steel. By 1876, Liberty’s thirty-foot long arm traveled to the United States with Bartholdi and turned him into a household name across America. Once Americans learned that they would be able to climb up to the balcony of the sky high torch for a mere fifty cents and gaze at the million dollar view of New York harbor, they were sold on it. The gleaming copper head also went on display creating an even bigger sensation but not big enough to solve the unending problem of raising the money to complete it.
THE LIE
The American press turned ugly. Reporters tore into Bartholdi like a pack of pit bulls when they discovered that the Statue of Liberty was a dusted off version of his rejected Egyptian statue. “The Statue is not a statue of liberty at all,” they protested. “It has nothing whatsoever to do with liberty!”
By trivializing the facts, Bartholdi bobbed and weaved, ducked and side stepped the accusations. “My Egyptian statue for the Suez canal ended then and there. Any resemblance it may have had to New York’s Statue of Liberty is purely coincidental”, defended Bartholdi in broken english. The American press didn’t buy it. They reported that the French sculptor had outright lied to the American people when he told them he had fashioned only "one" terra-cotta model for the Suez Canal project. In reality, he had made five! All of them were prototypes of the future Statue of Liberty, some with a torch or lantern in her left hand, some with it in her right hand. In all of them, she is wearing a long Greek chiton (χιτών). Over the chiton, she is wearing another garment, called the himation (ἱμάτιον).
Bartholdi had already admitted on record that the model for the Egyptian project was an Egyptian woman. His earliest 1870 model with the torch-lifting pose was the most damning evidence. It proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the American statue, ‘Liberty Enlightening the World’, was a dusted off version of the aborted Egypt statue, ‘Egypt Bringing Light to Asia’. Both were colossal, robed, torch-bearing women serving as lighthouses, both were sited for key points astride major world waterways and both passed their ‘symbolic messages’ from one continent to another.
To further Americanize his recycled Egyptian statue, Bartholdi added the date of the American Declaration of Independence onto the cover of the book held in the statue’s left hand - July IV MDCCLCCVI. No one asked why the date was written in ancient Roman numerals. No one clued in to the connection between Lady Liberty and the ancient Roman goddess ‘Libertas’ which is latin for ‘Liberty’.
PIGGYBANKS OF AMERICA
Because of the stellar costs of the French gift to America, the brotherhood decided that French and American citizens should foot the bill. French citizens would pay for the statue. American citizens would pay for the pedestal and foundation. Masonic brothers from both France and the United States formed a fund-raising committee called the Franco-American Union. By the time Libertas was ready to be shipped from France, little progress had been made on the other side of the Atlantic. Controversy continued to swirl over the origin of the statue and its mammoth costs.
Some American citizens had the good sense to ask, “why does the gift’s pedestal cost as much as the gift itself and why should we foot the bill for our own gift?” Americans living outside of New York considered it New York's statue. "Let New York pay for it!" To make matters worse, the wealthy French and American elite were allergic to the word ‘non-profit’ and wanted no part of the costly ‘non-profit’ project.
Public apathy in America became almost as monumental as the gift itself. By 1884, after years of pedestal fund-raising, only $182,491 had been raised. The fundraising committee brainstormed the idea of a public lottery. They pried open public wallets with prizes that included two works of art by Bartholdi himself. In another scheme, they sold signed clay models of his statue to both the French and American public. By the end of 1879, about 250,000 francs (approximately $750,000 U.S.) had been raised but ‘completing her’ in time for America's 100th anniversary was an impossible dream.
Lady Liberty’s trip to America had to wait until she had a pedestal to stand on. In the meantime, she was grounded in Paris. Joseph Pulitzer, a Jewish multimillionaire and owner of the American financial newspaper, The World, saw a golden opportunity to increase the size of his newspaper circulation. “Let us not wait for the millionaires to give this money,” said the multi-millionaire. “It is not a gift from the millionaires of France to the millionaires of America, but a gift of the whole people of France to the whole people of America." Pulitzer’s World newspaper circulation surged by almost 50,000 copies and single-dollar donations from grandmothers and pennies from the piggybanks of America’s schoolchildren began trickling in.
STRANGE RITUALS
By the time pedestal construction got underway, work had to be delayed until the cornerstone was laid in strict accordance with Masonic rituals. By American tradition, cornerstones of major public and private buildings like the Washington monument had to be "consecrated" first with full Masonic rites and ceremony. The tradition began in 1793 when Freemasonic U.S. President George Washington personally laid the cornerstone of the Capitol Building with the assistance of the Masonic Grand Lodge of Maryland.
It rained cats and dogs on August 5, 1884, the day of the private cornerstone ceremony. The elite guests boarded a boat draped with the red, white and blue flags of France and the United States. The vessel ferried approximately one hundred Freemason members of the Grand Lodge of New York, U.S. civic officials and the visiting French Masonic Grand Officers to Liberty (Bedloe's) Island. A United States Army band played the French National Anthem, "La Marseillaise," followed by "Hail Columbia" which named “the band of brothers joined” in its lyrics.
MYSTERY BOX
The cornerstone was laid on the raised northeast corner of Liberty’s pedestal with the same trowel used by Masonic President George Washington. Masonic men in black lowered a mysterious copper box inside the cornerstone containing a collection of strange mementos; twenty bronze medals of Masonic Presidents including Washington, Monroe, Jackson, Polk, Buchanan, Johnson and Garfield, a portrait of sculptor Bartholdi, a list on parchment of the Masonic Grand Lodge officers and a medal commemorating the erection of an Egyptian obelisk in Central Park at 81st street. Like the Washington monument, obelisks are tall, narrow, needle-like monuments built in honor of the Egyptian sun God ‘Amen’ (also spelled ‘Amun’ or ‘Amon’) meaning ‘the hidden one’.
No one questioned why a medal commemorating the erection of an Egyptian obelisk was placed inside the box. After the cornerstone was found to be square, level and plumb, the Freemason Grand Master applied the mortar and the stone containing the Masonic box of strange mementos was lowered into place. The Grand Master struck the stone three times with a gavel and declared it duly laid. Then the elements of "consecration" were presented - corn, wine, and oil known to be the "master's wages" in the days of Hebrew King Solomon.
Lady Liberty
6:01 AM | BY ZeroDivide
EDIT
Able Danger
10:06 PM | BY ZeroDivide
EDIT
Able Danger was a classified military planning effort led by the U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). It was created as a result of a directive from the Joint Chiefs of Staff in early October 1999 by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Hugh Shelton, to develop an information operations campaign plan against[citation needed] transnational terrorism.
According to statements by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and those of four others, Able Danger had identified 2 of 3 Al Qaeda cells active in the 9/11 attacks; the 'Brooklyn cell' linked to "Blind Sheik" Omar Abdel-Rahman, including September 11 attacks leader Mohamed Atta, and three of the 9/11 plot's other 19 hijackers.
In December 2006, a sixteen-month investigation by the US Senate Intelligence Committee concluded "Able Danger did not identify Mohamed Atta or any other 9/11 hijacker at any time prior to September 11, 2001," and dismissed other assertions that have fueled 9/11 conspiracy theories. The Senate Judiciary Committee first attempted to investigate the matter for the Senate in September, 2005. The Pentagon "ordered five key witnesses not to testify", according to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. "That looks to me as if it may be obstruction of the committee's activities," Specter, R-Pennsylvania, said at the start of his committee's hearing into the unit.[1]
Attorney Mark Zaid, representing Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer and the other four Able Danger employees at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in September 2005, pointed out to the Committee that his clients had been forbidden by the Pentagon to testify to the Committee. He also discussed the Defense Intelligence Agency's decision to suspend Lt. Colonel Shaffer's security clearance shortly after it became known that he had provided information to the 9/11 Commission on Able Danger. "Based on years of experience I can say categorically that the basis for the revocation was questionable at best."[2] [3]
An investigation by the Defense Department Inspector General's office (IG) in September 2006 concluded that "the evidence did not support assertions that Able Danger identified the September 11, 2001, terrorists nearly a year before the attack, that Able Danger team members were prohibited from sharing information with law enforcement authorities, or that DoD officials acted against LTC Shaffer for his disclosures regarding Able Danger." However, some of the people questioned by the IG claimed their statements to the IG were distorted by investigators in the final IG's report, and the report omitted essential information that they had provided. Lt. Col Tony Shaffer has claimed that the DOD retaliated against him for speaking out publicly about the IG report's distortions.[4]
The Senate panel of investigators said there was no evidence DoD lawyers stopped analysts from sharing findings with the FBI before the attacks. Analysts had created charts that included pictures of then-known Al Qaeda operatives, but none including Atta. A follow-up chart made after the attacks did show Atta. The Senate Committee said its findings were consistent with those of the DoD inspector general, released in September 2006. [5] [6]
Contents
[hide]Overview[edit]
The program used data mining techniques to associate open source information with classified information in an attempt to make connections among individual members of terrorist groups as part of its original "intelligence preparation of the battlespace". The objective of this particular project was to ascertain whether the data mining techniques and open source material were effective tools in determining terrorist activities, and if the resultant data could be used to create operational plans that could be executed in a timely fashion to interrupt, capture and/or destroy terrorists or their cells.[7][8]
According to statements by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and those of four others, Able Danger had identified 2 of 3 Al Qaeda cells active in the 9/11 attacks; the 'Brooklyn cell' linked to Blind Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, including September 11 attacks leader Mohamed Atta, and three of the 9/11 plot's other 19 hijackers, as possible members of an al Qaeda cell linked to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.[9]
This theory was heavily investigated and researched by Republican Representative Curt Weldon, vice chairman of the House Armed Services and HouseHomeland Security committees. However, Defense Intelligence Agency leadership had already ordered the hurried destruction of mined data, source databases, charts & resultant documents on entirely spurious legal grounds. DIA also prevented key personnel from testifying to both the Senate Judiciary & Senate Intelligence Committees, though after numerous denials did admit the program's existence.[10]
In December 2006, an investigation by the US Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that assertions could not be confirmed. It stated that they were unable to find supporting evidence regarding "one of the most disturbing claims about the Sept. 11 terrorist strikes."[5] This report released by the Senate Intelligence Committee copied, nearly verbatim, the United States Department of Defense Inspector General's September 2006 report on Able Danger.
Assertion that Able Danger identified 9/11 hijackers[edit]
The existence of Able Danger, and its purported early identification of the 9/11 terrorists, was first disclosed publicly on June 19, 2005, in an article[11] byKeith Phucas, a reporter for The Times Herald, a Norristown, Pennsylvania, daily newspaper. Eight days later, on June 27, 2005, Representative Curt Weldon, vice chairman of the House Armed Services and House Homeland Security committees, and the principal source for the Phucas article gave a special orders speech on the House floor detailing Able Danger:
Rep. Weldon later reiterated these concerns during news conferences on February 14, 2006. He believed that Able Danger identified Mohamed Atta 13 separate times prior to 9/11 and that the unit also identified a potential situation in Yemen two weeks prior to the October 12, 2000 attack on the USSCole.[13] The Pentagon released a statement in response, stating that they wished to address these issues during a congressional hearing before a House Armed Services subcommittee scheduled for Wednesday, February 15, 2006.
Able Danger and the 9/11 Commission[edit]
Curt Weldon's assertion that Able Danger identified the 9/11 hijackers was picked up by the national media in August 2005, after it was reported in the bimonthly Government Security News.[14] In addition to asserting that Able Danger identified the 9/11 hijackers and was prevented from passing that information onto the FBI, Weldon also alleged the intelligence concerning Able Danger was provided to the 9/11 Commission and ignored.[15] Two 9/11 Commission members, Timothy J. Roemer and John F. Lehman, both claimed not to have received any information on Able Danger.[14]
Following the GSN report, members of the 9/11 Commission began commenting on the information they had on Able Danger and Atta. Lee H. Hamilton, former Vice Chair of the 9/11 Commission, and Al Felzenberg, a former spokesman for the 9/11 Commission,[16] both denied that the 9/11 Commission had any information on the identification of Mohamed Atta prior to the attacks.[17] Hamilton told the media, "The Sept. 11 commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohamed Atta or of his cell.... Had we learned of it obviously it would've been a major focus of our investigation."[18]
Document Proclaims Secular Government
8:08 PM | BY ZeroDivide
EDIT
by Jim Walker
A few Christian fundamentalists attempt to convince us to return to the Christianity of early America, yet according to the historian, Robert T. Handy, “No more than 10 percent– probably less– of Americans in 1800 were members of congregations.”
The Founding Fathers, also, rarely practiced Christian orthodoxy. Although they supported the free exercise of any religion, they understood the dangers of religion. Most of them believed in deism and attended Freemasonry lodges. According to John J. Robinson, “Freemasonry had been a powerful force for religious freedom.” Freemasons took seriously the principle that men should worship according to their own conscience. Masonry welcomed anyone from any religion or non-religion, as long as they believed in a Supreme Being. Washington, Franklin, Hancock, Hamilton, Lafayette, and many others accepted Freemasonry.
Treaty of Tripoli
The Constitution reflects our founders views of a secular government, protecting the freedom of any belief or unbelief. The historian, Robert Middlekauff, observed, “the idea that the Constitution expressed a moral view seems absurd. There were no genuine evangelicals in the Convention, and there were no heated declarations of Christian piety.”
George Washington
Much of the myth of Washington’s alleged Christianity came from Mason Weems influential book, “Life of Washington.” The story of the cherry tree comes from this book and it has no historical basis. Weems, a Christian minister portrayed Washington as a devout Christian, yet Washington’s own diaries show that he rarely attended Church.
Washington revealed almost nothing to indicate his spiritual frame of mind, hardly a mark of a devout Christian. In his thousands of letters, the name of Jesus Christ never appears. He rarely spoke about his religion, but his Freemasonry experience points to a belief in deism. Washington’s initiation occurred at the Fredericksburg Lodge on 4 November 1752, later becoming a Master mason in 1799, and remained a freemason until he died.
To the United Baptist Churches in Virginia in May, 1789, Washington said that every man “ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience.”
After Washington’s death, Dr. Abercrombie, a friend of his, replied to a Dr. Wilson, who had interrogated him about Washington’s religion replied, “Sir, Washington was a Deist.”
Thomas Jefferson
Even most Christians do not consider Jefferson a Christian. In many of his letters, he denounced the superstitions of Christianity. He did not believe in spiritual souls, angels or godly miracles. Although Jefferson did admire the morality of Jesus, Jefferson did not think him divine, nor did he believe in the Trinity or the miracles of Jesus. In a letter to Peter Carr, 10 August 1787, he wrote, “Question with boldness even the existence of a god.”
Jefferson believed in materialism, reason, and science. He never admitted to any religion but his own. In a letter to Ezra Stiles Ely, 25 June 1819, he wrote, “You say you are a Calvinist. I am not. I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know.”
John Adams
John Adams
Adams, a Unitarian, flatly denied the doctrine of eternal damnation. In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, he wrote:
“I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved — the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!”
In his letter to Samuel Miller, 8 July 1820, Adams admitted his unbelief of Protestant Calvinism: “I must acknowledge that I cannot class myself under that denomination.”
In his, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” [1787-1788], John Adams wrote:
“The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.
“. . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.”
James Madison
Called the father of the Constitution, Madison had no conventional sense of Christianity. In 1785, Madison wrote in his Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments:
“During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.”
“What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not.”
Benjamin Franklin
Although Franklin received religious training, his nature forced him to rebel against the irrational tenets of his parents Christianity. His Autobiography revels his skepticism, “My parents had given me betimes religions impressions, and I received from my infancy a pious education in the principles of Calvinism. But scarcely was I arrived at fifteen years of age, when, after having doubted in turn of different tenets, according as I found them combated in the different books that I read, I began to doubt of Revelation itself.
“. . . Some books against Deism fell into my hands. . . It happened that they wrought an effect on my quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a through Deist.”
In an essay on “Toleration,” Franklin wrote:
“If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in the Romish church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. These found it wrong in the Bishops, but fell into the same practice themselves both here [England] and in New England.”
Dr. Priestley, an intimate friend of Franklin, wrote of him:
“It is much to be lamented that a man of Franklin’s general good character and great influence should have been an unbeliever in Christianity, and also have done as much as he did to make others unbelievers” (Priestley’s Autobiography)
Thomas Paine
This freethinker and author of several books, influenced more early Americans than any other writer. Although he held Deist beliefs, he wrote in his famous The Age of Reason:
“I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my church. “
“Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. “
The U.S. Constitution
The most convincing evidence that our government did not ground itself upon Christianity comes from the very document that defines it– the United States Constitution.
If indeed our Framers had aimed to found a Christian republic, it would seem highly unlikely that they would have forgotten to leave out their Christian intentions in the Supreme law of the land. In fact, nowhere in the Constitution do we have a single mention of Christianity, God, Jesus, or any Supreme Being. There occurs only two references to religion and they both use exclusionary wording. The 1st Amendment’s says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. . .” and in Article VI, Section 3, “. . . no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”
Thomas Jefferson interpreted the 1st Amendment in his famous letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in January 1, 1802:
“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State.”
Some Religious activists try to extricate the concept of separation between church and State by claiming that those words do not occur in the Constitution. Indeed they do not, but neither does it exactly say “freedom of religion,” yet the First Amendment implies both.
As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom:
“Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting “Jesus Christ,” so that it would read “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.”
James Madison, perhaps the greatest supporter for separation of church and State, and whom many refer to as the father of the Constitution, also held similar views which he expressed in his letter to Edward Livingston, 10 July 1822:
“And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
Today, if ever our government needed proof that the separation of church and State works to ensure the freedom of religion, one only need to look at the plethora of Churches, temples, and shrines that exist in the cities and towns throughout the United States. Only a secular government, divorced from religion could possibly allow such tolerant diversity.
The Declaration of Independence
Many Christians who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually present the Declaration as “proof.” The reason appears obvious: the document mentions God. However, the God in the Declaration does not describe Christianity’s God. It describes “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” This nature’s view of God agrees with deist philosophy but any attempt to use the Declaration as a support for Christianity will fail for this reason alone.
Article XI from the Treaty of Tripoli
Article XI from the Treaty of Tripoli
More significantly, the Declaration does not represent the law of the land as it came before the Constitution. The Declaration aimed at announcing their separation from Great Britain and listed the various grievances with the “thirteen united States of America.” The grievances against Great Britain no longer hold, and we have more than thirteen states. Today, the Declaration represents an important historical document about rebellious intentions against Great Britain at a time before the formation of our independent government. Although the Declaration may have influential power, it may inspire the lofty thoughts of poets, and judges may mention it in their summations, it holds no legal power today. Our presidents, judges and policemen must take an oath to uphold the Constitution, but never to the Declaration of Independence.
Of course the Declaration depicts a great political document, as it aimed at a future government upheld by citizens instead of a religious monarchy. It observed that all men “are created equal” meaning that we all come inborn with the abilities of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That “to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.” The Declaration says nothing about our rights secured by Christianity, nor does it imply anything about a Christian foundation.
Treaty of Tripoli
Unlike governments of the past, the American Fathers set up a government divorced from religion. The establishment of a secular government did not require a reflection to themselves about its origin; they knew this as an unspoken given. However, as the U.S. delved into international affairs, few foreign nations knew about the intentions of America. For this reason, an insight from at a little known but legal document written in the late 1700s explicitly reveals the secular nature of the United States to a foreign nation. Officially called the “Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary,” most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states:
Joel Barlow, U.S. Consul General of Algiers
Joel Barlow, U.S. Consul General of Algiers
Copyright National Portait Gallery Smithsonian Institution/Art Resource NY
Copyright National Portait Gallery Smithsonian Institution/Art Resource NY
“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 tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan 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.”
The preliminary treaty began with a signing on 4 November, 1796 (the end of George Washington’s last term as president). Joel Barlow, the American diplomat served as counsel to Algiers and held responsibility for the treaty negotiations. Barlow had once served under Washington as a chaplain in the revolutionary army. He became good friends with Paine, Jefferson, and read Enlightenment literature. Later he abandoned Christian orthodoxy for rationalism and became an advocate of secular government. Barlow, along with his associate, Captain Richard O’Brien, et al, translated and modified the Arabic version of the treaty into English. From this came the added Amendment 11. Barlow forwarded the treaty to U.S. legislators for approval in 1797. Timothy Pickering, the secretary of state, endorsed it and John Adams concurred (now during his presidency), sending the document on to the Senate. The Senate approved the treaty on June 7, 1797, and officially ratified by the Senate with John Adams signature on 10 June, 1797. All during this multi-review process, the wording of Article 11 never raised the slightest concern. The treaty even became public through its publication in The Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797.
So here we have a clear admission by the United States that our government did not found itself upon Christianity. Unlike the Declaration of Independence, this treaty represented U.S. law as all treaties do according to the Constitution (see Article VI, Sect. 2).
Although the Christian exclusionary wording in the Treaty of Tripoli only lasted for eight years and no longer has legal status, it clearly represented the feelings of our Founding Fathers at the beginning of the U.S. government.
Common Law
Signers of the Treaty of Tripoli
Signers of the Treaty of Tripoli
According to the Constitution’s 7th Amendment: “In suits at common law. . . the right of trial by jury shall be preserved; and no fact, tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law.”
Here, many Christians believe that common law came from Christian foundations and therefore the Constitution derives from it. They use various quotes from Supreme Court Justices proclaiming that Christianity came as part of the laws of England, and therefore from its common law heritage.
But one of our principle Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, elaborated about the history of common law in his letter to Thomas Cooper on February 10, 1814:
“For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law. . . This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first christian king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that of the last about 686. Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it.
“. . . if any one chooses to build a doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is incumbent on him to prove it to have existed, and what were its contents. These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.”
In the same letter, Jefferson examined how the error spread about Christianity and common law. Jefferson realized that a misinterpretation had occurred with a Latin term by Prisot, “*ancien scripture*,” in reference to common law history. The term meant “ancient scripture” but people had incorrectly interpreted it to mean “Holy Scripture,” thus spreading the myth that common law came from the Bible. Jefferson writes:
“And Blackstone repeats, in the words of Sir Matthew Hale, that ‘Christianity is part of the laws of England,’ citing Ventris and Strange ubi surpa. 4. Blackst. 59. Lord Mansfield qualifies it a little by saying that ‘The essential principles of revealed religion are part of the common law.” In the case of the Chamberlain of London v. Evans, 1767. But he cites no authority, and leaves us at our peril to find out what, in the opinion of the judge, and according to the measure of his foot or his faith, are those essential principles of revealed religion obligatory on us as a part of the common law.”
Thus we find this string of authorities, when examined to the beginning, all hanging on the same hook, a perverted expression of Priscot’s, or on one another, or nobody.”
The Encyclopedia Britannica, also describes the Saxon origin and adds: “The nature of the new common law was at first much influenced by the principles of Roman law, but later it developed more and more along independent lines.” Also prominent among the characteristics that derived out of common law include the institution of the jury, and the right to speedy trial.
Christian Sources
Virtually all the evidence that attempts to connect a foundation of Christianity upon the government rests mainly on quotes and opinions from a few of the colonial statesmen who had professed a belief in Christianity. Sometimes the quotes come from their youth before their introduction to Enlightenment ideas or simply from personal beliefs. But statements of beliefs, by themselves, say nothing about Christianity as the source of the U.S. government.
There did occur, however, some who wished a connection between church and State. Patrick Henry, for example, proposed a tax to help sustain “some form of Christian worship” for the state of Virginia. But Jefferson and other statesmen did not agree. In 1779, Jefferson introduced a bill for the Statute for Religious Freedom which became Virginia law. Jefferson designed this law to completely separate religion from government. None of Henry’s Christian views ever got introduced into Virginia’s or U.S. Government law.
Unfortunately, later developments in our government have clouded early history. The original Pledge of Allegiance, authored by Francis Bellamy in 1892 did not contain the words “under God.” Not until June 1954 did those words appear in the Allegiance. The United States currency never had “In God We Trust” printed on money until after the Civil War. Many Christians who visit historical monuments and see the word “God” inscribed in stone, automatically impart their own personal God of Christianity, without understanding the Framers Deist context.
In the Supreme Court’s 1892 Holy Trinity Church vs. United States, Justice David Brewer wrote that “this is a Christian nation.” Many Christians use this as evidence. However, Brewer wrote this in dicta, as a personal opinion only and does not serve as a legal pronouncement. Later Brewer felt obliged to explain himself: “But in what sense can [the United States] be called a Christian nation? Not in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or the people are compelled in any manner to support it. On the contrary, the Constitution specifically provides that ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.’ Neither is it Christian in the sense that all its citizens are either in fact or in name Christians. On the contrary, all religions have free scope within its borders. Numbers of our people profess other religions, and many reject all.”
Conclusion
The Framers derived an independent government out of Enlightenment thinking against the grievances caused by Great Britain. Our Founders paid little heed to political beliefs about Christianity. The 1st Amendment stands as the bulkhead against an establishment of religion and at the same time insures the free expression of any belief. The Treaty of Tripoli, an instrument of the Constitution, clearly stated our non-Christian foundation. We inherited common law from Great Britain which derived from pre-Christian Saxons rather than from Biblical scripture.
Today we have powerful Christian organizations who work to spread historical myths about early America and attempt to bring a Christian theocracy to the government. If this ever happens, then indeed, we will have ignored the lessons from history. Fortunately, most liberal Christians today agree with the principles of separation of church and State, just as they did in early America.
“They all attributed the peaceful dominion of religion in their country mainly to the separation of church and state. I do not hesitate to affirm that during my stay in America I did not meet a single individual, of the clergy or the laity, who was not of the same opinion on this point”
-Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1835
Bibliography
Borden, Morton, “Jews, Turks, and Infidels,” The University of North Carolina Press, 1984
Boston, Robert, “Why the Religious Right is Wrong About Separation of Church & State, “Prometheus Books, 1993
Boston, F. Andrews, et al, “The Writings of George Washington,” (12 Vols.), Charleston, S.C., 1833-37
Fitzpatrick, John C., ed., “The Diaries of George Washington, 1748-1799,” Houghton Mifflin Company: Published for the Mount Vernon Ladies Association of the Union, 1925
Gay, Kathlyn, “Church and State,”The Millbrook Press,” 1992
Handy, Robert, T., “A History of the Churches in U.S. and Canada,” New York: Oxford University Press, 1977
Hayes, Judith, “All those Christian Presidents,” [The American Rationalist, March/April 1997]
Kock, Adrienne, ed., “The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society,” New York: George Braziller, 1965
Mapp, Jr, Alf J., “Thomas Jefferson,” Madison Books, 1987
Middlekauff, Robert, “The Glorious Cause,” Oxford University Press, 1982
Miller, Hunter, ed., “Treaties and other International Acts of the United States of America,” Vol. 2, Documents 1-40: 1776-1818, United States Government Printing Office, Washington: 1931
Peterson, Merrill D., “Thomas Jefferson Writings,” The Library of America, 1984
Remsburg, John E., “Six Historic Americans,” The Truth Seeker Company, New York
Robinson, John J., “Born in Blood,” M. Evans & Company, New York, 1989
Roche, O.I.A., ed, “The Jefferson Bible: with the Annotated Commentaries on Religion of Thomas Jefferson,” Clarkson N. Potter, Inc., 1964
Seldes, George, ed., “The Great Quotations,” Pocket Books, New York, 1967
Sweet, William W., “Revivalism in America, its origin, growth and decline,” C. Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1944
Woodress, James, “A Yankee’s Odyssey, the Life of Joel Barlow,” J. P. Lippincott Co., 1958
Encyclopedia sources:
Common law: Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 6, “William Benton, Publisher, 1969
Declaration of Independence: MicroSoft Encarta 1996 Encyclopedia, MicroSoft Corp., Funk & Wagnalls Corporation.
In God We Trust: MicroSoft Encarta 1996 Encyclopedia, MicroSoft Corp., Funk & Wagnalls Corporation.
Pledge of Allegiance: Academic American Encyclopedia, Vol. 15, Grolier Incorporated, Danbury, Conn., 1988
Special thanks to Ed Buckner, Robert Boston, Selena Brewington and Lion G. Miles, for help in providing me with source materials.
Islam Versus the United States
8:02 PM | BY ZeroDivide
EDIT
Islam Versus the United States
|
This exposé is under construction
|
Click on images to enlarge
|
Christian North Africa circa 300 A.D.
|
|  Carthage was the main city in Roman North Africa. |
 Emperor Justinian (483-565). Roman Emperor from 527 to 565. |
|  Depiction of the plague by French artist Poussin. |
The area conquered by the Arabs became known as the Barbary States. When the U.S. was a young Republic in 1800, there were 4 Barbary States.
The Muslims of North Africa practiced slavery on a vast scale by raiding the coasts of Europe and stealing men, women, and children for slavery or to obtain ransom money from their relatives.
Their slave empire also extended southward into sub Sahara Africa.
 The 4 Barbary States were: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Tripoli. |
Prior to the Revolutionary War, American merchant ships enjoyed British protection on the high seas. Under the terms of Britain's treaties with other nations, including the Barbary States, American ships were issued British-backed passes of safe conduct for the Mediterranean.With independence, the situation changed completely. Gone was the protective Royal Navy and the young Republic's ships were fair game for the pirates.
These maritime passes operated on a very simple yet effective system that declared the bearer immune from seizure. The pass would be cut in half along a serrated, lateral line, the top of which was issued to a ship's captain, while the bottom half was given to the Barbary regency and copied for distribution to the corsair captains. When a vessel was boarded by pirates, the ship's captain would produce his pass, and if the edges and words or images matched, it was usually accepted-although occasionally a palm or two would need greasing; the prize would be released and allowed to sail away unmolested. Although fraught with abuse and forgery, the system worked reasonably well. (London, Victory in Tripoli, p.13).
Morocco seized the first U.S. ship in 1784
Morocco was the first country to seize a U.S. ship. The Betsey was a merchant brig and was seized off the coast of Spain in 1784.
Great Britain recognized the independence of the U.S. by the Treaty of Paris signed in September 1783. U.S. ships ceased to enjoy Royal Navy protection.
The newly independent colonies were not expected to last very long. The Continental Congress had 16 Presidents before George Washington was elected in 1789.
 Thomas Mifflin, Continental Congress President for only 7 months. |
|  Sultan Sidi Muhammad (1710-1790). |
News of the Betsey's capture reached the United States by February 1785. The American press received and expressed grossly exaggerated accounts both of the Betsey's capture and of the general situation in the Mediterranean. Reports of multiple captures by Morocco and Algiers were detailed in several newspapers, while leading papers in Pennsylvania and Virginia reported that an American captain had discovered from an Englishman that as many as six American ships had been seized by the Moors and their crews sold into captivity. By the summer of 1785, the media exaggerations subsided as hard facts emerged. (London, Victory in Tripoli, pp. 27-28).The release of the crew was obtained by Spain's foreign minister who was vitally interested in gaining control of the former British colonies:
The situation was satisfactorily resolved with the friendly intervention of Spain's foreign minister, conde de Floridablanca. Besides spreading goodwill, the minister was eager to resolve the Mississippi question in North America and hoped that his intercession would help to maintain cordial relations with the United States—a potentially valuable regional ally against the British. On July 9, 1785, the emperor of Morocco liberally agreed to release the Betsey, including her crew and her cargo, in exchange for America's pledge to send a peace negotiator very soon to conclude a formal treaty. During the intervening months, the cargo and ship were lost, but Moroccan affability prevailed and restitution was made. (London, Victory in Tripoli, pp. 27-28).The very same year, Algeria declared war on the United States—the first nation to do so:
A mere three months after the Betsey was seized, however, a far greater disaster befell the United States in Barbary. Two American ships and their combined crew of twenty-one men were captured and enslaved by Algerine pirates. The Boston schooner Maria (or Mary), commanded by Captain Isaac Stevens, was seized off Cape Saint Vincent, at the southern tip of Portugal, on July 24, and the Philadelphia ship Dauphin (or Dolphin), commanded by Captain Richard O'Brien, was seized off Cadiz, Spain, on July 30, 1785. But this time Spain was not coming to the rescue. (London, Victory in Tripoli, pp. 27-28).
The first Barbary War started in 1801
The first Barbary War started during the Presidency of Thomas Jefferson. President Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826). President from 1801 to 1809. |
|  Secretary of State James Madison (1751-1836). |
In May 1786, Thomas Jefferson, then the U.S. ambassador to France, and John Adams, then the U.S. ambassador to Britain, met in London with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the resident Tripolitan ambassador, to try to negotiate a peace treaty to protect the United States from the threat of Barbary piracy. These future U.S. presidents questioned the ambassador as to why his government was so hostile to the new American Republic even though America had done nothing to provoke any animosity of any sort. Ambassador Adja answered them, as they reported to the Continental Congress, "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, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once." (London, Victory in Tripoli, pp. 23-24).
Here are just 3 quotes from the "Holy" Koran that justifies killing those who do not convert to Islam:
Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe neither in God nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what God and His apostle have forbidden, and do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued. (Sura 9:29).At the time of President Jefferson the tribute was GOLD . . . now it's PETRODOLLARS!!
When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take ransom from them, until War shall lay down her burdens. (Sura 47:1).
They would have you disbelieve as they themselves have disbelieved, so that you may be all alike. Do not befriend them until they have fled their homes for the cause of God. If they desert you, seize them and put them to death wherever you find them. (Sura 4:87).
 Commodore Stephen Decatur (1779-1820). |
|  U.S. sailors in hand to hand combat with Barbary pirates. |
Commodore Stephen Decatur killed the captain of a Tripolitan gunboat in a hand-to-hand engagement at Tripoli, August 3, 1804. The wars with the Barbary pirates marked the first time the United States became involved militarily with the Muslim world.
 William Eaton. (1764-1811). |
|  The Battle of Derna in 1805. |
The Tripoli Monument was moved from Washington City in 1860
The Tripoli Monument is the oldest military monument in the U.S. It honors the fallen heroes of the First Barbary War: Captain Richard Somers, Lieutenant James Caldwell, James Decatur, Henry Wadsworth, Joseph Israel and John Dorsey. Originally known as the Naval Monument, it was carved of Carrara marble in Italy in 1806 and brought to the United States as ballast on board the USS Constitution (Old Ironsides). Tripoli Monument. |
This monument commemorating the first Barbary War stood right in front of the U.S. Capitol building for almost 40 years.
It was moved just before the Civil War began in 1861. |  Close up of Tripoli Monument. |
Most of the people who were involved in the Barbary Wars met untimely deaths. One was the personal secretary to George Washington. Here are just 5 prominent people who suffered an early demise.
| Thomas Barclay (1728-1793). Personal representative of Washington to the Barbary States died suddenly in Lisbon aged 65 years. |
| William Eaton (1764-1811)—the hero of the Battle of Derna died at the young age of 47. |
| Stephen Decatur (1779-1820) was challenged to a duel and died at the young age of 41. |
| John Paul Jones (1747-1792) died suddenly in Paris after receiving a commission from President Jefferson to fight the Barbary pirates. He was 45 years old. |
| Tobias Lear (1762-1816) was the personal secretary of George Washington and President Jefferson's envoy to Tripoli. His death at the young age of 54 was reported as a "suicide." |
ASSASSIN comes from the Arabic HASHISHIYYUN!!
The word assassin comes from the Arabic word hashishiyyan meaning hashish taker. The word was brought back to Europe by the Crusaders to describe a highly secretive Muslim sect who specialized in assassinating their enemies.
Here is the dictionary definition of assassin:| 1. | a murderer, esp. one who kills a politically prominent person for fanatical or monetary reasons. |
| 2. | one of an order of Muslim fanatics, active in Persia and Syria from about 1090 to 1272, whose chief object was to assassinate Crusaders. |
 President Abraham Lincoln (1819-1865). |
|  Assassination of President Lincoln. |
Matías Romero—the Mexican representative in Washington City was constantly urging the President to declare war on France for stationing troops in Mexico.
Thank the Triune God that President Lincoln outwitted them all and slavery was issued a deadly blow both in the South . . . and in the entire Muslim world!!
The U.S. was free from the payment of tribute to Islam from 1815 to 1933
The second and last Barbary War was fought in 1815. On June 20, Commodore Stephen Decatur left New York with a squadon of 10 ships.
The squadron arrived off Algiers on June 28. The THREAT of using force was enough to force the Barbary States of Algeria, Tunis, and Tripoli to sign peace treaties and promise never again to attack U.S. ships.
Barbary piracy and extortion seemed to be ended for good.
That is until 1933, when John D. Rockefeller and Henry Ford starting paying tribute again in the form of PETRODOLLARS:
The Standard Oil Company discovered oil in Saudi Arabia in 1933. Rockefeller ordered the oil wells closed in the United States and Saudi oil began flowing into this country.
John D. Rockefeller (1839-1937).
|
|  Henry Ford (1863-1947). |
Vital Link
References
Brighton, Ray. The Checkered Career of Tobias Lear. Portsmouth Marine Society, Portsmouth, NH,1985.
Bartleee, W.B. The Assassins: The Story of Medieval Islam's Secret Sect. Sutton Publishing, Gloustershire, UK, 2002.
De Kay, James Tertius. A Rage for Glory: The Life of Commodore Stephen Decatur, USN. Free Press, New York, 2004.
Fremont-Barnes, Gregory. The Wars of the Barbary Pirates. Osprey Publishing, Oxford, UK, 2006.
London, Joshua E. Victory in Tripoli. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, 2005.
Roberts Priscilla H & Richard S. Thomas Barclay (1728-1793) Consul in France, Diplomat in Barbary. Bethlehem: Lehigh University Press, 2008.
Dawood, N.J. The Koran with Parallel Arabic Text. Penguin Classics , New York & London, 1990.
Gabriel, Mark A. Islam and Terrorism. What the Quaran Really Teaches About Christianity, Violence and the Goals of the Islamic World. Charisma House. Lake Mary, Florida, 2002.
Gordon, Murray. Slavery in the Arab World. New Amsterdam Books, New York, 1998.
Khan. M.A. Islamic Jihad. A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery. iUniverse, Inc., New York & Bloomington, 2009.