To: steve kammerer who wrote (6890 ) 1/31/2005 3:40:48 PM From: Elmer Flugum Respond to 1797 TREATY WITH TRIPOLI sunnetworks.net Conclusion : History revisionists of the so-called "religious right" strain to repudiate the 1797 Treaty with Tripoli as irrelevant and unofficial; they make much ado about the fact that Barlow's version in English was a poor paraphrase of the version in Arabic; and they grind their teeth over the fact that it was the only English version in existence and the only one considered when the Senate of the United States read, accepted, approved, and ratified the 1797 Treaty with Tripoli. The fact which completely destroys their argument is that none of the Senators who read, accepted, approved, and ratified the Treaty could read Arabic. The official and only 1797 Treaty with Tripoli which was read, accepted, approved, and ratified by the Senate of the United States was the one penned by Joel Barlow in the English language. And, whether the so-called "religious right" revisionists like it or not, Article 11 of the official 1797 Treaty with Tripoli was in the Treaty in 1797 and is appropriately recorded in the official treaty book: "The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."
