Quote# 64091

The Treaty of Tripoli was signed in Tripoli on November 4th, 1796. The English text of the treaty was approved by the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797 and ratified by President John Adams on June 10, 1797. It was recently discovered that the US copy of the Arabic version of the treaty not only lacks the quotation, it lacks Article XI altogether. Instead it seems to contain the text of a letter to the Pasha of Tripoli from the Dey of Algiers.
The person who translated the Arabic to English was Joel Barlow, Consul General at Algiers, a close friend of Thomas Paine--and an opponent of Christianity. It is possible that Barlow made up Article XI, but since there is no Arabic version of that article to be found, it's hard to say.
In 1806 a new Treaty of Tripoli was ratified which no longer contained the quotation.

God is in a good mood!, Y! answers 35 Comments [7/19/2009 1:24:43 PM]
Fundie Index: 29

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 | bottom

b. beau brinker

-citation needed-
Anyone care to add that xkcd pic?

7/19/2009 1:29:34 PM

HAHAHAHA man you guys are cute

7/19/2009 1:32:04 PM


We still have the first amendment AND Jefferson's letter.

7/19/2009 1:38:21 PM



I know that wikipedia isn't a scholarly source, but... it says you're wrong.

7/19/2009 1:38:23 PM

Sula Nebouxii

Wait, why would this even matter? I thought the whole point of bringing up the Treaty of Tripoli was that the early Congress passed it unanimously, providing evidence that the country wasn't founded on Christian principles.

7/19/2009 2:20:33 PM

@Sula Nebouxii: Exactly. The Arabic version means next to squat, since the U.S. is governed by whichever version was ratified by Congress and signed by the President. And that just happens to be the one in English with Article XI.

7/19/2009 2:27:57 PM


And yet no citation?

7/19/2009 2:52:53 PM


I think there's a strong implication of fundamentalism here, but I'm not seeing it explicitly. In context, this could just be one very mistaken scholar. (Aside from the name.)

7/19/2009 3:23:58 PM


Why would the Arabic version even matter to you or anyone else for that matter?Are you Arabic?Do you plan on being Arabic?No.Then shut up and get over it.We're not,nor have we ever been and hopefully never will be a christian nation.

7/19/2009 3:31:35 PM


Oh no you fucking didn't. CITATION NEEDED, BITCH.

It makes me *so mad* when fundies just pull shit like that out of their ass. Because then it's not them being confused or misled or gullible - they KNOW they're wrong, and they keep on saying those things anyway. They willfully and knowingly shit all over our American history in order to keep their idea of some theocratic bullshit intact.

And it's not some inconsequential "nice story," either - no "NASA found a lost day in time!" glurge here. There are CONGRESSMEN and CONGRESSWOMEN who believe this stuff. They write our laws, basing them on these LIES.

It makes me so mad.

7/19/2009 4:27:33 PM


History FAIL.

7/19/2009 5:06:45 PM


Stop me if I'm wrong, but typically treaties between countries are gone over and over again by different (and if possible, neutral, translators since the invention of the UN) translators to make sure that no small little misinterpretation or little different use of language is simply not possible. (Otherwise one country or another would use it to their advantage - once in a while we learn from history.)

Then again, these people freak out when their bible is translated into Arabic and the judeo-christian god is written as allah.

7/19/2009 5:26:28 PM


oh, and

7/19/2009 5:27:12 PM


In this context the Arabic copy is irrelevent. Any 1806 version is also irrelevent. The point is that the president and the entire Senate affirmed the version which says the United States is in no way a Christian nation.

7/19/2009 5:52:19 PM

Old Viking

Believes in the Bible. Is concerned about "made up" portions of documents.

7/19/2009 6:34:06 PM


Was it your brother's second cousin's (twice-removed) pastor who told you this story? Or was it some guy (whose name you didn't catch) you met in a bar?

7/19/2009 10:29:45 PM


Regardless of what the Arabic version of it said, the English version is the one Congress ratified, including Article 11.

So um... yeah. Shove it.

7/19/2009 11:18:45 PM


Normal way of thinking:
1) Norm pulls bulshit out of his ass and/or repeats something other guy said
2) someone posts factual document that proves norm wrong
3) normal person admits (s)he is wrong, and or change it's reasoning

Fundie way of thinking:
1) Fundie pulls bulshit out of his ass and/or repeats something other fundie said
2) someone posts factual document that proves fundie wrong
3)fundie attacks factual document

7/19/2009 11:59:04 PM


Oh, really?

7/20/2009 1:16:25 AM


Fine you win, we'll be Christian nation. But don't come running to us when-

-Taxes skyrocket to pay for the building and upkeep of more churches, all the heresy trials, and arrests of women for showing an ankle that are sure to ensue.

-The quality of healthcare, education, farm production and factory workmanship hits rock bottom, because bible study and indoctrination are now the primary focus of schools and half the workforce is removed, because women will be forced back into the home.

-We plunge into civil war because we can't agree on which branch of christianity is the "correct" one.

-Your wife hates you because she was forced into marriage, raped nearly every night, made to squeeze out about 15 brats, can almost never leave the house, and must be covered from head to toe when she does.

-You're bored off our ass because there's no more entertainment industry, non-religious literature, football season (The NFL plays on Sundays, and that's the Lord's day, right?) or any other recreation because it's all a sin.

-You wind up in Hell anyway for killing all those people who didn't pretend to share your beliefs just to save their hides.

Read the Handmaid's tale, and then come back and tell us that that's what you really want.

7/20/2009 2:43:26 AM

Mister Spak

It was also recently discovered the original copy of the bible does not say Jesus is the son of god.

7/20/2009 4:53:41 AM

Zeus Almighty

Historical revision for Jebus.

7/20/2009 12:32:55 PM

Swedish Pagan

This is what happens with translations all the time. Think of what might have been done with the KJV...

7/20/2009 12:38:01 PM


[citation needed]

7/20/2009 2:56:55 PM

Alien Acid

Oh, for crying out loud... We all knew something like this was coming, didn't we?

7/21/2009 1:39:53 AM

1 2 | top: comments page