Ellison/Jefferson Quran - Eloquent Historical Irony

The "swearing in" ceremonies are behind us. The first Muslim congressman used the now famous Quran that once belonged to Thomas Jefferson. Columnist Dennis Prager and Virginia Rep. Virgil Goode should be ashamed of themselves for their boorish behavior in the ridiculous statements they've made that amount to a religious test. Now is not the time for hysteria and insult slinging, it's time for informed debate. That Mr. Jefferson had a quran is not surprising, he was extremely well read and erudite on many and varied topics. What we may need to be reminded of right now is that as president, Mr Jefferson, like President Bush, had his share of tangles with jihadist muslims. The line from the Marine Hymn, "to the shores of Tripoli" refers to the land and naval battles against Islamic pirates of the Barbary States. An excellent backgrounder for this episode is found at earlyamerica.com's article entitled, "Terrorism In Early America - The U.S. Wages War Against The Barbary States To End International Blackmail and Terrorism" -- By Thomas Jewett

The Barbary States was a collective name given to a string of North African seaports stretching from Tangiers to Tripoli. These ports were under the nominal control of the Ottoman Empire, but their real rulers were sea rovers or corsairs who sallied forth from the coast cities to plunder Mediterranean shipping and capture slaves for labor or ransom.

Is Mr Ellison, shown at right in this AP photo, wisely trying to put this recent example of Congressman Goode's ignorance behind him , or is he doing his best to cover our infant nation's military engagement with jihadist kidnappers demanding ransom, tribute, and (what else?) submission?

"It was good, we did it, it's over, and now it's time to get down to business," he said.
Asked if he was relieved to have it behind him, Ellison said, "Yeah, because maybe we don't have to talk about it so much anymore. Not that I'm complaining, but the pressing issues the country is facing are just a little bit more on my mind right now."
...Ellison's mother, Clida Ellison, said in an interview that she thought any controversy over her son's choice was good, "because many people in America are going to learn what the diversity of America is all about." emphasis mine

Let's all listen to this mom! The controversy is good, and we do, in light of this jihadist mentality, need to have a discussion on whether or not there are limits to "diversity" not only in the criminal sense, but constitutionally as well. Western criticisms of Islam is eerily similar then and now. Consider the words of William Eaton, U.S. consul to Tunis, (1799-1803) commander of the marine expedition to remove the Barbary ruler (1804)...

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.

The Jan 3rd WashPo typically ignored the huge implications of the Jefferson Quran for the trivial and carried a breathless snort by Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts that included

Yet the holy book at tomorrow's ceremony has an unassailably all-American provenance. We've learned that the new congressman -- in a savvy bit of political symbolism -- will hold the personal copy once owned by Thomas Jefferson.

And this from Ellison's campaign,

"Keith is paying respect not only to the founding fathers' belief in religious freedom but the Constitution itself," said Ellison spokesman Rick Jauert.

In the home front propaganda war with jihadism, the first right-cross is a direct hit to the decidedly un- scholarly Virgil Goode...

One person unlikely to be swayed by the book's illustrious history is Goode, who released a letter two weeks ago objecting to Ellison's use of the Koran. "I believe that the overwhelming majority of voters in my district would prefer the use of the Bible," the Virginia Republican told Fox News, and then went on to warn about what he regards as the dangers of Muslims immigrating to the United States and Muslims gaining elective office.
Yeah, but what about a Koran that belonged to one of the greatest Virginians in history? Goode, who represents Jefferson's birthplace of Albemarle County, had no comment yesterday.

As one reluctant to be perceived as aligned with Mr Goode, I too am not swayed, so make that two. And I don't think Mr. Jefferson would be sleeping so well either. Wouldn't it be nice if just one "news" outlet would finish the sentence?

We've learned that the new congressman -- in a savvy bit of political symbolism -- will hold the personal copy once owned by Thomas Jefferson -- who, by the way, went to war against Islamic fascists in North Africa, to end the humiliating Mediterranean practice of paying "tribute" to the Barbary States.

Over at the New English Review blog, the Iconoclast, Hugh Fitzgerald comes from a very different direction than I, but is also calling for education.

One begins to look forward, at this point, to the desecration of Jefferson's Qur'an by Ellison, as he attempts to enroll it in a stunt that will now be remembered for all the questions it has raised and will continue to raise, and for the prompting, or excuse it gives, to discussion about not only Jefferson, but John Quincy Adams, and indeed of everyone of significance in the Early Republic, and the universal view of the perfidy of the Muslim states and peoples with whom they had to negotiate...

The strength of the symbolism is obvious only because Jefferson is such an icon of American roots. But only to a point. If one knows the background of his Danbury Baptist letter, one knows that its true context is NOT what our leftist American brethren want us to believe. And so one knows that he can, has been, and almost certainly will be mis-used. That's important, because it's ba-ack! This May 4, 2006 Frontpage Mag article by Andrew G. Bostom titled "America’s First War on Terror" like most of his work, is longish but necessary to understand the adversary(ies) we face.

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.

It's unlikely that Jefferson's possession of a Quran denotes any fondness for its teachings. Rather, it is affirmation in his belief that more freedom of speech and the press (and religion) is better than less. That he engaged them in battle simply to establish trade routes with southern Europe without the fear of capture, enslavement, and murder, probably draws us to a conclusion far different from what today's democrat would like. Unfortunately, having forced the concept of a free Mediterranean on the Tripolitans, they agreed to let American shipping proceed. The naval commanders charged with negotiating took the easiest victory, and let the jihadist pirates off. Perhaps because the Muslims were trusted to adhere to their word, President Madison had to re-visit the issue a few years later. Just a couple of weeks after the "War of 1812" was finally concluded in February of 1815, President Madison requested and received permission from congress to declare that "a state of war exists" and dispatched two naval squadrons to Tunisia and made quick work of crushing the pirate regime.
Jihadists had been terrorizing Europe for over 400 years. Their merciless treachery, by the time the United States became involved, had been well established. The circumstances that paralyzed the European nations from taking action for themselves are probably a fascinating study. But the circumstances providing for the end of the terror is not a mystery. President Madison learned from the negotiating mis-steps made during his predecessor's term.
Considering also the spectacle of the Imams aggressive prayer in the aircraft, and the cabbies at the airports who will decide who is "righteous" enough to get a ride... the real story behind the propaganda of Jefferson's Quran that Congressman Ellison used to ceremonially swear in to the 110th congress, is

"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." William Eaton