GOP Rep. Liz Cheney,

[Ga96]

22 minutes ago, DarterBlue said:

That part is totally untrue. Prove me wrong. Muslims were not a threat in Jefferson's time, and there were few if any in the USA at the country's founding. 

That alabama dummy literally just tried to write his own history 😂

[HSFBfan]

2 minutes ago, Ga96 said:

That alabama dummy literally just tried to write his own history 😂

Nope i didn't but great try 

[concha]

 

I believe he is referring to the Barbary States. with whom the country had a military conflict over piracy during Jefferson's presidency.

 

 

[HSFBfan]

8 minutes ago, concha said:

 

I believe he is referring to the Barbary States. with whom the country had a military conflict over piracy during Jefferson's presidency.

 

 

Yes i am. The first Barbary wars with the north African countries that were part of the ottoman empire. Muslims 

[DarterBlue]

52 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

Go look up the tripoli pirates. They were Muslims. So yes they were. Thomas Jefferson read the koran to understand them 

https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/first-barbary-war

https://www.city-journal.org/html/jefferson-versus-muslim-pirates-13013.html

In America? Or in North Africa? If the latter, what was Jefferson worrying himself over them for?

[HSFBfan]

9 minutes ago, DarterBlue said:

In America? Or in North Africa? If the latter, what was Jefferson worrying himself over them for?

He was worried about foreign forces attacking our extremely young country. He understood how big the ottoman empire was and their ability to conquer and enslave people. He sent our very young navy over there as a presence of military might of our country esp in term of human right violations. 

Read Thomas jefferson and the tripoli pirates. Great book. Brian kilmeade is the author 

The cause of the U.S. participation was pirates from the Barbary States seizing American merchant ships and holding the crews for ransom, demanding the U.S. pay tribute to the Barbary rulers. United States President Thomas Jefferson refused to pay this tribute. Sweden had been at war with the Tripolitans since 1800.

^[6]

^{https://www.ukessays.com/essays/history/why-were-the-barbary-wars-important-history-essay.php}

[DarterBlue]

3 hours ago, HSFBfan said:

He was worried about foreign forces attacking our extremely young country. He understood how big the ottoman empire was and their ability to conquer and enslave people. He sent our very young navy over there as a presence of military might of our country esp in term of human right violations. 

Read Thomas jefferson and the tripoli pirates. Great book. Brian kilmeade is the author 

The cause of the U.S. participation was pirates from the Barbary States seizing American merchant ships and holding the crews for ransom, demanding the U.S. pay tribute to the Barbary rulers. United States President Thomas Jefferson refused to pay this tribute. Sweden had been at war with the Tripolitans since 1800.

^[6]

^{https://www.ukessays.com/essays/history/why-were-the-barbary-wars-important-history-essay.php}

I did some reading on this. This wasn't about the fact they were Muslims. It was about defending American interests from piracy. 

[HSFBfan]

Just now, DarterBlue said:

I did some reading on this. This wasn't about the fact they were Muslims. It was about defending American interests from piracy. 

But they were muslims and they were a threat. So u saying they were not a threat during jefferson time is not correct. 

[DarterBlue]

6 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

But they were muslims and they were a threat. So u saying they were not a threat during jefferson time is not correct. 

But the battle was not driven by religious factors. It was piracy. There is not a shred of evidence that religion played any role in what happened.  

[HSFBfan]

1 minute ago, DarterBlue said:

But the battle was not driven by religious factors. It was piracy. There is not a shred of evidence that religion played any role in what happened.  

I didnt say it was. All I did was point out that it was Muslims who were creating the piracy. So no it was not a direct religious thing. But the religion of rhe culprits were muslims

[DarterBlue]

1 hour ago, HSFBfan said:

I didnt say it was. All I did was point out that it was Muslims who were creating the piracy. So no it was not a direct religious thing. But the religion of rhe culprits were muslims

The fact they were Muslims is of little consequence. It is like saying that the Pirates of the Caribbean were christian. Nominally, both may be true, but factually neither is of any consequence. For at the end of the day, both worshiped lucre and not God.  

[HSFBfan]

Just now, DarterBlue said:

The fact they were Muslims is of little consequence. It is like saying that the Pirates of the Caribbean were christian. Nominally, both may be true, but factually neither is of any consequence. For at the end of the day, both worshiped lucre and not God.  

Ok point being we have dealt now with the Muslims for 200 years. 

It's of pretty big consequence since we are still dealing with them today. 

But anyway back to Liz. She will not survive long in her position if they want her out 

[DarterBlue]

4 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

Ok point being we have dealt now with the Muslims for 200 years. 

It's of pretty big consequence since we are still dealing with them today. 

But anyway back to Liz. She will not survive long in her position if they want her out 

Yes, that incident occurred over 200 years ago. But until the first Gulf War, we had not been at war with Muslims since. The 20 century wars with Muslims have been fueled by our support for Israel. Far be it from me to debate the pros and cons of this support, but it has certainly inflamed Arab attitudes towards America in recent times. My point being that for the better part of the 200 + year period, we were not at war with Muslims. 

[HSFBfan]

2 minutes ago, DarterBlue said:

Yes, that incident occurred over 200 years ago. But until the first Gulf War, we had not been at war with Muslims since. The 20 century wars with Muslims have been fueled by our support for Israel. Far be it from me to debate the pros and cons of this support, but it has certainly inflamed Arab attitudes towards America in recent times. My point being that for the better part of the 200 + year period, we were not at war with Muslims. 

Not sure when the uss cole was blown up. 

We did have the Iranian hostage situation. I know not a war with them but a situation 

We did back the afghanis against the russians in the 70s 

And yes our support for the Israelis fuels their anger towards America. And I question that support mostly because I don't know enough to say if we should or not 

[concha]

4 minutes ago, DarterBlue said:

Yes, that incident occurred over 200 years ago. But until the first Gulf War, we had not been at war with Muslims since. The 20 century wars with Muslims have been fueled by our support for Israel. Far be it from me to debate the pros and cons of this support, but it has certainly inflamed Arab attitudes towards America in recent times. My point being that for the better part of the 200 + year period, we were not at war with Muslims. 

 

DB, you and I have our differences, but you are trying to reason with and educate a guy with the intelligence of a lobotomized hamster and morals of an einsatzgruppen member.

On another thread - just today - he was actually encouraging the return of the Klan to represent the white man's interests.

 

[HSFBfan]

me and darter will never agree on much but we can have rationale convos about many different things knowing we will not agree on 97% of things 

[DarterBlue]

4 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

me and darter will never agree on much but we can have rationale convos about many different things knowing we will not agree on 97% of things 

97% may be a bit high. Probably more like 95%. But the difference between the two is not much!😃

[HSFBfan]

Just now, DarterBlue said:

97% may be a bit high. Probably more like 95%. But the difference between the two is not much!😃

exactly which is fine it doesn't bother me

Its when views are suppressed is the problem 

I have always been the black sheep of the boards and the one who stirs the pot but my views are my views and I've always been very honest. 

I expect everyone on here to express their views on every subject fully and honestly 

[DarterBlue]

11 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

exactly which is fine it doesn't bother me

Its when views are suppressed is the problem 

I have always been the black sheep of the boards and the one who stirs the pot but my views are my views and I've always been very honest. 

I expect everyone on here to express their views on every subject fully and honestly 

I believe people should be allowed to express their views honestly. I have one exception to this: They should never threaten another poster or encourage another poster to attack anyone. 

I also believe, that if an individual is confronted with a view that is well thought out from a different perspective, at the very least it should be read carefully and thoughtfully and if it is of sound logic one should be able to reassess one's current views. In other words, the capacity to change is necessary for growth. This does not mean you blindly follow another's opinion, it does mean it should be given the respect it deserves if it is well thought out. 

[HSFBfan]

2 minutes ago, DarterBlue said:

I believe people should be allowed to express their views honestly. I have one exception to this: They should never threaten another poster or encourage another poster to attack anyone. 

I also believe, that if an individual is confronted with a view that is well thought out from a different perspective, at the very least it should be read carefully and thoughtfully and if it is of sound logic one should be able to reassess one's current views. In other words, the capacity to change is necessary for growth. This does not mean you blindly follow another's opinion, it does mean it should be given the respect it deserves if it is well thought out. 

I'm absolutely good with all of this. I dont believe anyone life should be threatened but I do believe all views should be stated.

Now we do have that ignore feature which is also fine 

But if we can't be completely honest with everyone than what is the point in conversing