America’s First Victory Over Terrorism

article35 article3 article8 article11 article12 article36 article39

Yesterday I made two profound discoveries.

1. My great, great, great grandfather, Captain Isaac Hull directed, and engaged the enemy in America’s first War Against Islamic Terrorists.

2. Virginia Hambley’s great great, great grandfather, Louis de Bourmont, brought French legitimists before King Miguel, and recognized him a heir to the throne of France. Miquel is the grandfather of Empress Zita who fled to America when Hitler put a price on her head. Zita’s son was Otto Von Habsburg. Bourmont was in many respects similar to Jean of Arc, minus the religious visions. He was very keen on following a bloodline.

Miguel was assisted by the French General Bourmont, who, after the fall of Charles X of France came with many of his legitimist officers to the aid of the king of Portugal (that is, Miguel).”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_I_of_Portugal

Louis de Bourmont backed Henry Count of Chambord as the rightful heir to the thrown of France. Louis commanded the land forces that took major cities in Algiers. When de Bourmont refused to recognize  to support the “Citizen King” Louis-Philippe, he was relieved of his command. Who knows how much territory de Bourmont would have taken in the second War against Muslim Terrorist. Louis must have studied the success of Hull and William Eaton that ended with the Treaty of Tripoli that produced Article X1.

It is my intention to compose a letter the President of the United States and the U.S. Senate making them aware of Hull and Bourmont who served Nation and King, and not God/Jesus. I am seeking a attorney to help me bring a lawsuit against Tom Cotton, and the Senators who signed his letter. There is powerful evidence these men were motivated by their religious ambitions they shared with Benjamin Netanyahu. Together these men grievously interfered with the negotiations with Iran who militias have handed ISIS defeats in Iraq. Many Republicans are altering true American history in order that it be subserviant to their faux religious history. Boehner’s attorney has quit the lawsuit against President Obama who has ordered our Air Force to bomb ISIS.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/stopping-the-next-tom-cotton-stunt-it-starts

Here is a letter from my kindred the Department of the Navy. He lists three Marines who shed their blood in Tunisia where there was a attack on the museum that was home to the Bey Captain Isaac Hull did battle with.

My bond with Virginia will last a lifetime. Her mother looks very much like Louis de Bourmont.

Jon Presco

Copyright 2015

article13 virginia2 Proposal 019lastaaaa

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri,_Count_of_Chambord

UNITED STATES BRIG Argus

DERNE 28th April 1805

SIR, I have the honor to inform you, that at 9 O.Clock in the morning of the 27th being about 10 Miles to the Eastward of the Town of Derne, with the Hornet in Company, we discovered the Nautilus at Anchor very close to the shore, which led us to suppose that Capt. Dent had fallen in with Mr. Eatons Army, as he had been sent in shore for that purpose the day before. — We made all sail for the Nautilus, and at 1/2 past 10 spoke her, and was informed by Capt. Dent that he had, had communication with Mr. Eaton the night before, and that he wished to have the field Pieces landed as soon as possible, and that Mr. Eaton intended to make an attack upon Derne as soon as he could get possession of them, being then about two and a half miles from the Town, and the Enemy having sent him a chalenge, hoisted out our Boat to send the field Pieces on shore with such supplies as Mr. Eaton was in want of, but on approaching the shore we found that it was impossible to land the Guns without hauling them up an almost perpendicular rock Twenty feet above the Boat. But with the perseverence of the Officer and men sent on this service, they effected the landing one of them, by hauling them u the steep Rock. Mr. Eaton finding that we should loose time in landing the other, sent it off again informing me that he should march for the Town as soon as he could possibly mount the field Piece that he had on shore, gave Lieutenant Evans Orders to stand close in shore, and cover the Army while they were preparing to march, in case the Enemy should come out against them, as they had already made their appearance in large numbers outside of the Town, gave Orders for the necessary preparations to be made for the attack by Sea upon the Town and Batteries, and stood down very close to the Town. — At 2 P.M. Mr. Eaton began the attack by Land, at same time the Hornet Lieut. Evans Anchored with Springs on his Cables, within One hundred Yards of the Battery of eight Guns, and commenced a heavy fire upon it.

The Nautilus took her station to the Eastward of the Hornet, at 1/2 a miles distance from shore, and opened upon the Town & Battery. The Argus Anchored without, and a little to the Eastward of the Nautilus, and began firing on the Town and Battery — The fort kept up a heavy fire for about an hour, after which the shot flying so thick about them, they abandoned it, and run into the Town and Gardens back — The Guns of the Vessels were turned on the Beach, and kept a heavy fire upon the Enemy to clear the way for the few brave Christians Mr. Eaton had with him, to enter the fort as they were gaining ground very fast though a heavy fire of Musquetry was constantly kept upon them from behind the Houses and old Walls near the shore. At about half past 3 we had the satisfaction to see Lieut. O.Bannon, and Mr. Mann Midshipman of the Argus, with a few brave fellows with them, enter the fort, haul down the Eenemys flag, and plant the American Ensign on the Walls of the Battery, and on turning the Guns of the Battery upon the Town, they found that the Enemy had left them in great haste, as they were found primed and loaded at their hand. —

Whilst our men were turning the Guns of the Battery upon the Town, Hamet Bashaw had taken possession of the back part of it, which brought the Enemy between two fires, which soon silenced them, and about four in the Afternoon we had complete possession of the Town and Fort, sent all our Boats on shore, for the purpose of carrying Amunition to the Fort, and to bring off the wounded men, as soon as possible, that they might be dressed. — Mr. Eaton gave the necessary Orders at the Fort, and went into the Town to see every thing quiet, and to make arrangements for the Towns being well guarded during the night. At half past five, he returned on board to get his wound dressed, having received a Musquet Ball thro’ his left wrist. — On collecting our men we found one killed and Thirteen Wounded, a list of which I have the honor to send you. — (Signed) ISAAC HULL

John Wilton, a Marine…Killed

William Eaton Esqr…Wounded

David Thomas, Marine…Wounded

Bernard O’Brian, Marine…Wounded

George Emanuel (Greek)…Wounded

Spedo Levedo (Greek)…Wounded

Bernardo Jamase (Greek)…Wounded

Nicholo George (Greek)…Wounded

George Goree (Greek)…Wounded

Capt. Lucca (Greek)…Wounded

Names unknown 3 (Greek)…Wounded

Angelo Fermosa (Maltee)…Wounded

 

Source: Naval Documents Related to the United States Wars with the Barbary Powers, Volume V (1944): pp. 547-548.

article9 article10 article38 article40 article43article33

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4mw5_X2XLY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqNe1SST3W0

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j52jsQCk6P4

He served the restored Louis XVIII (reigned 1814–24) in the French expedition to suppress an uprising in Spain (1823). Six years later he was appointed minister of war in the tottering government of the ultrarightist Prince de Polignac. In Algeria in 1830, Bourmont’s speedy conquest earned him a marshal’s baton. Refusing to support the “Citizen King” Louis-Philippe, he became implicated in the plots of the Duchess de Berry (1832) and went into exile in Portugal. There—as always on the side of absolutism—he aided the pretender Michael in the civil war of 1833–34. After the victory of the constitutional forces, he retired to Rome. He later returned under the amnesty of 1840 to France, where he remained a staunch supporter of the Bourbon pretender Henri, Count de Chambord.

The events of September 11, 2001 shocked the United States out of its complacency concerning its invulnerability. Even though the U.S. has the most powerful military machine on earth, it might be of little avail; it seems that a new type of war will be fought. A war that will need resolve, years of effort, and new tactics.This is not the first conflict in which America has faced such deprivations against life and property. There was another time when it was determined that diplomacy would not only be futile, but humiliating and in the long run disastrous. A time when ransom or tribute would not buy peace. A time when war was considered more effective and honorable. And, a time when war would be fought, not with large concentrations of military might, but by small bands peopled with individuals of indomitable spirit.Almost 180 years ago our infant country attacked Tripoli under circumstances that are eerily similar to contemporary times. That conflict, immortalized in the Marine Corps Hymn, “From the Halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli” called the Tripolitan War or the Barbary Pirate War, came shortly after we gained our independence from England. The United States chose to fight the pirates of Barbary, rather than pay tribute, as did all the other nations who traded in the Mediterranean Sea. The decision was bold, but the eventual victory by the tiny United States Navy broke a pattern of international blackmail and terrorism dating back more than one hundred and fifty years.

 

Though Decatur is the best-remembered hero of the 1st Barbary War, Captain William Eaton led the conflict’s most daring raid. Eaton, the former consul of Tunis, established an alliance between the United States and the former Bashaw of Tripoli Hamet Karamanli, who had been deposed by his brother Yusuf Karamanli (Jusef Caramanli).  In the Spring of 1805, Eaton and Hamet marched an army of 400 Arab and Greek mercenaries across the Libyan Desert and attacked Tripoli’s second city of Derna.  They easily captured the city with the help of three American ships led by Captain Isaac Hull.  Before the force could continue on to Tripoli, General Consul Tobias Lear and the Danish Consul Nicholas C. Nissen, reached a peace settlement with the Bashaw. The agreement stipulated that after paying a $60,000 ransom, the United States no longer needed to offer tributes to Tripoli.  Americans celebrated the treaty as a victory for free trade, Hamet returned to exile in Egypt, Eaton returned to America, and the war with Tripoli came to an end.

Andrew Sterret, captain of the Enterprise, won the first American victory of the war.  On August 1, 1801, Sterret captured Rais Mahomet Rous’ 14-gun corsair Tripoli.  The Enterprise inflicted heavy casualties on the enemy without suffering a single loss.  However, because the United States Congress had not formally declared war with Tripoli, Sterret could not take the Tripoli as a prize and instead threw its guns overboard and released the ship.  Sterret returned to Baltimore where he and his crew were celebrated as heros.  Sterret’s victory is commemorated in the 1801 poem “Sterret’s Sea Fight“:

When troubles with the Barbary states heated up in 1802, he went to the Mediterranean as First Lieutenant of the frigate Adams. Hull later commanded the schooner Enterprise and the brig Argus, receiving promotion to the rank of Master Commandant in 1804 and to Captain in 1806. During the next few years, he supervised the construction of gunboats and, in 1809 and 1810, was successively given command of the frigates, Chesapeake, President and Constitution.

On the return of the Constitution to Boston, Lieutenant Hull was directed to superintend the repairs of the ship; but before this service was completed, he was ordered to proceed as first lieutenant of the frigate Adams to the Mediterranean. He subsequently commanded the schooner Enterprise of 12 guns, and rendered in her effectual aid to Captain Rodgers in the John Adams, in capturing a large corsair before the harbor of Tripoli. The next vessel that he was appointed to command was the Argus of 16 guns, which was in 1804; in which year, also, he was promoted to the rank of a master-commandant. He was made a captain in 1806. In the Argus, he cruised for some time off the coast of Morocco to watch the movements of corsairs in the ports of that state; and after rejoining Commodore Preble’s squadron off Tripoli, he was ordered to the Bay of Naples, and charged with the protection of American property in the event of the French gaining possession of that city. The next office intrusted to him was the conveying, on board of his vessel, of General Eaton and his officers to Alexandria, in Egypt. He at length returned to the United States, after an absence of four years and three months, and was immediately ordered to superintend the construction of gun-boats, in pursuance of the system adopted during the administration of President Jefferson. He was successively appointed to the command

http://encyclopaedic.net/american-encyclopedia-biography/commodore-isaac-hull

In 1802, Hull headed to the Mediterranean as first lieutenant of the Adams and then was given his first command on the Enterprise. In 1803, Stephen Decatur delivered Hull’s new command: the Argus. Hull commanded the Argus for three years, cruising in the Mediterranean with Edward Preble. His most important role there was as support for the marine expedition of William Eaton. While commanding the Argus, Hull was promoted to master commandant in 1804 and then to captain in 1806.

http://abbymullen.org/preblesboys/items/show/3469

In May 1804, Eaton was given the commission of a navy lieutenant and sent back to the Barbary regencies, under the supervision of Commodore James Barron, to find Hamet Caramelli and enlist his cooperation in the war.[12] Eaton found Caramelli in Alexandria and signed an agreement with him,[14] although it is unclear if he had the authority to do so.[12] This contract, which was forwarded to Secretary of State Madison, specified that the United States would provide cash, ammunition and provisions for Hamet Caramelli’s re-installation as pasha.[16] It also designated William Eaton as “General and Commander in Chief” of the land forces that were to be used to carry out the operation.[16] The agreement defined the relationship between Caramelli and Eaton as well as their mission, but was never ratified by the United States Senate.[16]

The Americans included eight marines and two navy midshipmen. It was with that force that Eaton and Caramelli made the 600 mile trek from Alexandria to Derne, a coastal city within the realm of Tripoli. By the time the band had reached the Gulf of Bomba, they had eaten their last rations and the Arab factions were on the verge of mutiny. Eaton had written to Captain Isaac Hull of the USS Argus requesting that the ship meet them there with supplies, but when they arrived on April 15, there was no ship to be seen. The next day, however, the Argus appeared as Hull had seen the smoke from their fires. After resupplying, they continued their journey, and on April 27, 1805, Eaton’s forces attacked and took control of Derne.[10][13]Captain Presley O’Bannon of the U.S. Marine Corps raised the American flag for the first time over a conquered foreign city.”[14] At the Battle of Derne, one marine was killed and two were wounded. Eaton was wounded in the left wrist.[16]

Twice Yusef Caramelli’s forces tried and failed to take back the city. With the bey of Derne on the run and Hamet Caramelli reestablished in Derne, Eaton thought to march toward Tripoli. He requested reinforcements from Barron but instead received word that US Consul-General Tobias Lear was negotiating peace with Yusef Caramelli . Then he received word from Lear himself that he was to surrender Derne as peace had been reached on June 4.[16] The terms of the treaty required the US to pay $60,000 for the release of the crew of the Philadelphia. Hamet Caramelli and his entourage of about 30 were allowed to leave, but his wife and family were held captive until 1807, as provided in the treaty.[13]

Aftermath[edit]

Although Eaton returned to the United States to a hero’s welcome, he was disappointed and embittered by the treaty and outraged that ransom had to be paid for the freeing of the hostages. He had been denied victory in Tripoli and his agreement with Hamet Caramelli was left unkept. Furthermore, the government owed him money that he had fronted for the expedition. He complained loudly that the government was guilty of duplicity in regard to Hamet Caramelli. His complaints drew the attention of Jefferson’s enemies in the Federalist party.[16]

William Eaton (23 February 1764[1] – 1 June 1811[2]) was a United States Army officer and the Consul to Tunis (1797–1803). He played an important diplomatic and military role in the First Barbary War between the United States and Tripoli (1801–05). He led the first foreign United States military victory at the Battle of Derne by capturing the Tripoli subject city of Derne in support of the restoration of the pasha, Hamet Caramelli.[3] William Eaton also gave testimony at the treason trial of Aaron Burr.[4] He served one term in the Massachusetts State Legislature. Eaton died on June 1, 1811 at the age of forty-seven.

http://liarsforjesus.com/footnotes_7.htm

https://books.google.com/books?id=gsYvkj5G_kQC&pg=PA55&lpg=PA55&dq=william+eaton+Isaac+hull&source=bl&ots=amdhDwbb52&sig=O48z7McqddrWStuq5YEmAP0MJs8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7iEUVdi5GsSyogS8mYGYAg&ved=0CEkQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=william%20eaton%20Isaac%20hull&f=false

https://historiasapodeixis.wordpress.com/2013/06/27/the-battle-of-derna-1805-primary-sources/

https://books.google.com/books?id=Ke01AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA703&lpg=PA703&dq=william+eaton+Isaac+hull&source=bl&ots=HdC4xcEDSD&sig=WDG04iYHh1aasL3DEt-s7d34WGU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UiUUVbe2JMbdoATsl4GgAg&ved=0CEQQ6AEwCjgK#v=onepage&q=william%20eaton%20Isaac%20hull&f=false

https://books.google.com/books?id=3YphBlon5G0C&pg=PA189&lpg=PA189&dq=william+eaton+Isaac+hull&source=bl&ots=EavNQUgz8p&sig=MuU_y45wiVdUEeMHHNa5uHp4Vqo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oSsUVdvVHMOGyASV74LADg&ved=0CB0Q6AEwADgU#v=onepage&q=william%20eaton%20Isaac%20hull&f=false

In 1804, during the fourth year of the First Barbary War, the former American consul to Tunis, William Eaton returned to the Mediterranean. Titled “Naval Agent to the Barbary States,” Eaton had received support from the US government for a plan to overthrow the pasha of Tripoli, Yusuf Karamanli. After meeting with the commander of US naval forces in the area, Commodore Samuel Barron, Eaton traveled to Alexandria, Egypt with $20,000 to seek out Yusuf’s brother Hamet. The former pasha of Tripoli, Hamet had been deposed in 1793, and then exiled by his brother in 1795.

After contacting Hamet, Eaton explained that he wished to raise a mercenary army to help the former pasha regain his throne. Eager to retake power, Hamet agreed and work began to build a small army. Eaton was aided in this process by First Lieutenant Presley O’Bannon and eight US Marines, as well as Midshipman Pascal Peck. Assembling a ragtag group of around 500 men, mostly Arab, Greek, and Levantine mercenaries, Eaton and O’Bannon set off across the desert to capture the Tripolitan port of Derna.

Departing Alexandria on March 8, 1805, the column moved along the coast pausing at El Alamein and Tobruk. Their march was supported from the sea by the warships USS Argus, USS Hornet, and USS Nautilus under the command of Master Commandant Isaac Hull. Shortly after the march began, Eaton, now referring to himself as General Eaton, was forced to deal with a growing rift between the Christian and Muslim elements in his army. This was made worse by the fact that his $20,000 had been used and money to fund the expedition was growing scarce.

On at least two occasions, Eaton was forced to contend with near mutinies. The first involved his Arab cavalry and was put down at bayonet-point by O’Bannon’s Marines. A second occurred when the column lost contact with Argus and food became scarce. Convincing his men to eat a pack camel, Eaton was able to stall until the ships reappeared. Pressing on through heat and sand storms, Eaton’s force arrived near Derna on April 25 and was resupplied by Hull. After his demand for the city’s surrender was refused, Eaton maneuvered for two days before initiating his attack.

Dividing his force in two, he sent Hamet southwest to severe the road to Tripoli and then attack the western side of the city. Moving forward with the Marines and the other mercenaries, Eaton planned to assault the harbor fortress. Attacking on the afternoon of April 27, Eaton’s force, supported by naval gunfire, met determined resistance as the city’s commander, Hassan Bey, had reinforced the harbor defenses. This permitted Hamet to sweep into the western side of the city and capture the governor’s palace.

Grabbing a musket, Eaton personally led his men forward and was wounded in the wrist as they drove the defenders back. By the end of the day, the city had been secured and O’Bannon hoisted the US flag over the harbor defenses. It was the first time the flag had flown over a foreign battlefield. In Tripoli, Yusuf had been aware of the approach of Eaton’s column and had dispatched reinforcements to Derna. Arriving after Eaton had taken the city, they briefly laid siege before assaulting it on May 13. Though they pushed Eaton’s men back, the attack was defeated by fire from the harbor batteries and Hull’s ships.

I find it appropriate that on this day, April 27, the 206th anniversary of the first major battle conducted overseas by the United States of America, the Bataan ARG and Marines of the 22nd MEU take station off the shores of Tripoli.

The United States Navy and the United States Marine Corps have been in these waters before, and just like 206 years ago the maritime services find themselves fighting a tyrant in Tripoli while supporting an insurgency movement across Libya. One wonders if the outcome in 2011 will be similar to 1805.

Aftermath:

The Battle of Derna cost Eaton a total of fourteen dead and several wounded. Of his force of Marines, two were killed and two wounded. O’Bannon and his Marines’ role has been commemorated by the line “to the shores of Tripoli” in the Marine Corps Hymn as well as the adoption of the Mamaluke sword by the Corps. Following the battle, Eaton began planning a second march with the goal of taking Tripoli. Concerned about Eaton’s success, Yusuf began suing for peace. Much to Eaton’s displeasure, Consul Tobias Lear concluded a peace treaty with Yusuf on June 4, 1805, which ended the conflict. As a result, Hamet was sent back to Egypt, while Eaton and O’Bannon returned to the United States as heroes.

Is it possible in 2011 that landing Marines ashore is the next step towards pushing Libya towards a negotiated settlement? In 1805, it was the presence of an Army near Tripoli, not the use of an Army in Tripoli, that let to a negotiated solution. It is sad how our political leaders no longer think of military power in the context of limited objectives, rather only in context of limited use – the distinction being very important.

The Rest of the Story

In 1815, Stephen Decatur delivered swift and decisive blows against Algiers that forced a settlement with all three Barbary states and the United States. Algiers backed out of the treaty the day after it was signed, but with no American hostages held the United States observed the activities of Algiers without involvement.

It wasn’t until August of 1816 that a combined British and Dutch fleet crushed Algiers and finally removed the piracy threat represented by the Barbary states. Algiers and Tunis became protectorates of France, while Tripoli fell under the domain of the Ottoman Empire until September of 1911, when Italy declared war on Tripoli and later assumed control of the colony.

In January of 1943, Tripoli was conquered once again by the British under Montgomery with allied support from New Zealand. Tripoli was administrated under British rule until declaring independence in 1951.

http://www.informationdissemination.net/2011/04/bataan-arg-sails-in-wake-of-history.html

http://clements.umich.edu/exhibits/online/barbary/barbary-images.php

http://www.wsj.com/articles/iran-condemns-saudi-arabias-military-intervention-in-yemen-1427366776

Rep. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said in an interview broadcast Tuesday that Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) believes “faith is something that only happens at 11 o’clock on Sunday mornings,” triggering criticism and a call for an apology from Pryor’s campaign.

Cotton’s remark came as he was praising the Supreme Court’s ruling that some employers don’t have to cover certain contraceptives for employees as required under the federal health-care law.

“It’s just another example of how Obamacare infringes on the liberties of all Arkansans,” Cotton told KNWA. “Barack Obama and Mark Pryor think that faith is something that only happens at 11 o’clock on Sunday mornings. That’s when we worship. But faith is what we live every single day. And the government shouldn’t infringe on the rights of religious liberty.”

Pryor’s spokesman called on Cotton to apologize. In a statement, Pryor argued that Cotton’s remarks were unwarranted.

“I’m disappointed in Congressman Cotton’s deeply personal attack on me,” the senator said in the Wednesday statement. “He and I may disagree on issues, but for him to question my faith is out of bounds. From a young age I have never shied away from talking about the importance of God in my life, and it’s my Christian faith that gives me comfort and guidance to be a steady voice for Arkansas in the Senate.”

When asked for a reaction, Cotton’s campaign passed along a statement from Cotton calling Pryor a “man of faith” but not backing down from his comments.

“Senator Pryor is a man of faith and practices it with commendable openness, which I respect, but I wish he would respect Arkansans’ right to practice our faith,” Cotton said. “Instead, Senator Pryor and President Obama still defend Obamacare even after the Supreme Court said it violated freedom of religion. Senator Pryor supports taxpayer-funded abortion and late-term abortion and would force Christians to pay for abortions despite their deeply held religious beliefs. That’s a real attack on faith.”

Cotton is challenging Pryor in a key contest in the battle for the Senate majority. Pryor has sought to emphasize his Christian faith in the campaign. In December, he ran an ad invoking the Bible.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/07/02/fight-over-tom-cottons-faith-comment-erupts-in-arkansas-senate-race/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/12/04/pryor-invokes-bible-in-new-ad/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis-Auguste-Victor,_Count_de_Ghaisnes_de_Bourmont

Miguel was assisted by the French General Bourmont, who, after the fall of Charles X of France came with many of his legitimist officers to the aid of the king of Portugal (that is, Miguel). He was later replaced by the Scottish General Ranald MacDonnell who withdrew the Miguelist army besieging Lisbond to the almost impregnable heights of Santarém, where Miguel established his base of operations. The battles continued in earnest. In Alcácer the Miguelist forces captured some ground but this was quickly lost to General Saldanha in Pernes and Almoster. The latter action (February 18, 1834) was the most violent and bloody of the civil war. In the end, politics sealed Miguel’s fate: his alliance with Carlos of Spain alienated the sympathies of Ferdinand VII of Spain, who recognized Maria’s claim to the Portuguese throne, and concluded a quadruple alliance with the queen and Peter as well as with the governments of France and England.

http://osdir.com/ml/culture.templar.rosemont/2005-04/msg00034.html

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Auguste_Victor_de_Ghaisne_de_Bourmont

The Invasion of Algiers in 1830 was a large-scale military operation by which the Kingdom of France, ruled by Charles X, invaded and conquered the Ottoman Regency of Algiers. Algiers had been a province of the Ottoman Empire since the Capture of Algiers in 1529 by Hayreddin Barbarossa.

A diplomatic incident, the so-called Fan Affair, served in 1827 as a pretext to initiate a blockade against the port of Algiers. After three years of standstill and a more severe incident in which a French ship carrying an ambassador to the dey with a proposal for negotiations was bombarded, the French determined that more forceful action was required. Charles X was also in need of diverting attention from turbulent French domestic affairs that culminated with his deposition during the later stages of the invasion in the July Revolution.

The invasion of Algiers began on 5 July 1830 with a naval bombardment by a fleet under Admiral Duperré, and a landing by troops under Louis Auguste Victor de Ghaisne, comte de Bourmont. The French quickly defeated the troops of Hussein Dey, the Ottoman ruler, but native resistance was widespread. This resulted in a protracted military campaign, lasting more than 45 years, to root out popular opposition to the colonisation. The so-called “pacification” was marked by resistance of figures such as Ahmed Bey, Abd El-Kader and Lalla Fatma N’Soumer.

The invasion marked the end of several centuries of Ottoman rule in Algeria and the beginning of French Algeria. In 1848, the territories conquered around Algiers were organised into three départements, defining the territories of modern Algeria.

French troops landed at Sidi Ferruch on 14 June 1830 against minimal opposition. Within a few days, however, troops of Algerian caids started to rise against the invaders. On 18 June, Hussein Dey assembled a 10,000-man army, comprising 1,000 Janissaries, 5,000 Moors and 3,000 Arabs and Berbers from Oran, Titteri and Medea. Bourmont merely kept the counter-attacks at bay until 28 June, when siege weapons were landed, making it possible to attack Algiers itself.

Fighting at the gates of Algiers.

Ornate Ottoman cannon, length: 385cm, cal:178mm, weight: 2910, stone projectile, founded 8 October 1581 in Algiers, seized by France at Algiers in 1830. Musée de l’Armée, Paris.

Sultan-Khalessi, the main fort defending the city, was attacked on 29 June and fell on 4 July. The Bey then started negotiations, leading to his capitulation the next day. At the same time, in France, the July Revolution led to the deposition of Charles X. French troops entered the city on 5 July, and evacuated the Casbah on 7 July. The French had 415 killed.

The Dey was exiled to Naples, and some of the Janissaries to the Ottoman Empire. Bourmont immediately instituted a municipal council and a governmental commission to administer the city.

Before the new status of Algiers could be settled, Bourmont struck at Blida and occupied Bône and Oran in early August. On 11 August, news of the July Revolution reached Algiers, and Bourmont was required to pledge allegiance to Charles’ successor Louis-Philippe, which he refused to do. He was relieved of command and replaced by general Bertrand Clauzel on 2 September. Negotiations were started with the beys of Titteri, Oran and Constantine to impose a French protectorate, spreading French influence over the entire former Regency.

Louis Philippe I (6 October 1773 – 26 August 1850) was King of the French from 1830 to 1848 as the leader of the Orléanist party. His father Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans had supported the Revolution of 1789 but was nevertheless guillotined during the Reign of Terror. Louis Philippe fled France and spent 21 years in exile. He was proclaimed king in 1830 after Charles X, of the senior Bourbon line, was forced to abdicate. His reign, known as the July Monarchy, was dominated by wealthy elite and numerous former Napoleonic officials.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Philippe_I

http://gw.geneanet.org/pierfit?lang=fr;p=louis+auguste+victor;n=de+ghaisne+de+bourmont

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/NHC/accidents.htm

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/former-us-marine-killed-islamic-state-s-tripoli-province_828927.html

http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,041905_Barbary,00.html

If a Senate Democrat gets her way, Tom Cotton won’t be writing any more meddling letters to foreign governments.

Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan has filed a non-binding, tongue-in-cheek resolution in that aims to prevent her colleagues from meddling with the president’s foreign policy agenda by denying them stationery or electronic devices on which to write letters with that intent.

The amendment to the Senate budget resolution was submitted in response to the open letter sent to Iran’s leadership by Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton and signed by 46 of his Republican colleagues, in hopes of putting the brakes on the ongoing nuclear negotiations with the Obama administration.

The text of Stabenow’s resolution says its purpose is to “establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to the purchase of stationery or electronic devices for the purpose of members of Congress or congressional staff communicating with foreign governments and undermining the role of the President as Head of State in international nuclear negotiations on behalf of the United States.”

While Cotton’s letter was indeed written on official Senate stationery, he presumably still has a few stray pages lying around his office. Ditto the use of Cotton’s existing electronic devices and Senate e-mail address.

And let’s be clear: Stabenow’s act of political trolling does not have a chance of becoming law, much less being introduced for an actual vote as part of the budget resolution.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/stopping-the-next-tom-cotton-stunt-it-starts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adelaide_of_L%C3%B6wenstein-Wertheim-Rosenberg

Infanta Maria das Neves of Portugul

Infanta Maria das Neves

Duchess of San Jaime

Spouse

Alfonso Carlos of Bourbon, Duke of San Jaime

Full name

Portuguese: Maria das Neves Isabel Eulália Carlota Adelaide Micaela Gabriela Rafaela Gonzaga de Paula de Assis Inês Sofia Romana

House

House of Braganza
House of Bourbon

Father

Miguel I of Portugal

Mother

Adelaide of Löwenstein-Wertheim-Rosenberg

Born

(1852-08-05)5 August 1852
Kleinheubach

Died

14 February 1941(1941-02-14) (aged 88)
Vienna, Nazi Germany

Burial

Puchheim Castle

Infanta Maria das Neves of Portugal[1][2] (Portuguese: Maria das Neves Isabel Eulália Carlota Adelaide Micaela Gabriela Rafaela Gonzaga de Paula de Assis Inès Sofia Romana, Infanta de Portugal[2]) (5 August 1852[1][2] – 15 February 1941[1][2]) was the eldest child and daughter[1][2] of exiled Miguel of Portugal and his wife Adelaide of Löwenstein-Wertheim-Rosenberg.[1][2]

Maria was born in Kleinheubach, an Infanta of Portugal and member of the House of Braganza by birth. Until the birth of her brother Miguel, Duke of Braganza, Maria was titled Princess Royal of Portugal, a title of pretense, given her father had been deposed in 1834. Through her marriage to Alfonso Carlos of Bourbon, Duke of San Jaime, Carlist claimant to the Spanish throne, Maria was titular Queen consort of Spain, France, and Navarre.

Maria married Alfonso Carlos of Bourbon, Duke of San Jaime, second son[1][2] of Juan, Count of Montizón and his wife Archduchess Maria Beatrix of Austria-Este,[1][2] on 26 April 1871 in Kleinheubach.[1][2] Alfonso Carlos was her first cousin once removed, as Maria’s father (Miguel of Portugal) and his paternal grandmother (Infanta Maria Francisca of Portugal) were siblings. Their union produced only a son who died some hours after his birth, in 1874. They were unable to have more children and died childless.[1][2] Maria died in Vienna, Austria, aged 88.

Adelgundes married Prince Henry of Bourbon-Parma, Count of Bardi, fourth child and youngest son[1][2] of Charles III, Duke of Parma and his wife Princess Louise Marie Thérèse of France,[1][2] on 15 October 1876 in Salzburg, Austria–Hungary.[1][2] Henry, who was twenty five years old, had been previously married to Princess Maria Immacolata of Bourbon-Two Sicilies who had died three months after their marriage at the age of 19 in 1874. Henry had taken part in the Carlist war and fought in the Battle of Lacar. War wounds turned him into an invalid. Adelgundes and Henry’s union produced no issue, as her nine pregnancies all ended in miscarriages. The failed pregnancies, the last of which she suffered in 1890, were a source of great grief to the couple.[1][2] They divided their time between the Castle of Seebenstein in Austria and the Vedndrami-Caligari palace in Venice. Adelgundes spent long years looking after her paralyzed husband. The Count of Bardi was described by relatives as a disagreeable man who tyrannized his sweet petite wife. After almost thirty years of marriage, Adelgundes became a widow in 1905. She was close to her many nephews and nieces, particularly to her niece Grand Duchess Marie-Adélaïde of Luxembourg from the time of her abdication to her early death.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanta_Adelgundes,_Duchess_of_Guimar%C3%A3es

On October 15, 1884 at Schloss Fischorn, Maria Antonia married Robert I, Duke of Parma as his second wife. She bore him twelve children. Maria Antonia was widowed when Robert died at Villa Pianore on November 16, 1907. Later on she resided with her daughter Zita while in exile. By 1940, Zita and her family, Maria Antonia and her daughter Isabella were living in reduced circumstances in Quebec. Eventually, after the War‘s end, Maria Antonia moved to Berg Castle, Luxembourg where she celebrated her 90th birthday. After lingering for many years, she died there in 1959 aged 96. Many of her children and grandchildren have also lived very long lives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanta_Maria_Antonia_of_Portugal

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/03/26/gop-congressman-says-pregnant-women-are-attacked-because-god-is-punishing-america-for-legal-abortion-video/

<img
src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/p?c1=2&c2=17503306&cv=2.0&cj=1"/>

During his little sermon, Klingenschmitt ties the attack on the pregnant woman to a passage from Hosea, where God punishes the Samaritans for rebelling and says, “their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open.”

Referring back to the victim’s experience and abortion laws, Klingenschmitt says:

“I wonder if there is prophetic significance to America today in that scripture. This is the curse of God upon America for our sin of not protecting innocent children in the womb — and part of that curse for our rebellion against God as a nation is that our pregnant women are ripped open.”

The shaming and fearmongering that Republicans busy themselves with has absolutely no end.

Tony Perkins, the rabid homophobe who is the President of one of the most notoriously hateful anti-LGBT groups in the nation, has crawled out from under his rock this week to opine on what will happen if marriage equality comes to all 50 U.S. states. However, Perkins may have gone too far this time. His statements seem to actually indicate that if the Supreme Court rules in favor of equal marriage this June, that anti-LGBT Christians will resort to violence in protest.

“I think. . . your point about Christians rising up, I think we are getting close to that in this country as we see increasingly this growing hostility at the hands of our own government toward Christianity and I think especially if the court imposes upon the nation a redefinition of marriage. Ion’t think the nation is going to accept it, I absolutely don’t, and the conflict that is going to come as a result of it.”

Well, Mr. Perkins, the thing is, you don’t get to force other people to live by your extremist version of Christianity. Nobody is trying to take your views away. No matter how bigoted and misguided they may be, you are certainly entitled to have them. However, what you are doing now is inciting violence from the airwaves, and if it comes to fruition, you and all of you holy-rolling Christian soldiers will be arrested for it.

Perkins went on to direct Christians to engage in 21 days of prayer on the issue, between Easter and the time when the Supreme Court hears the marriage equality oral arguments this coming June. After that, though, his statements seemed to directly call for violence from his fellow Christians, when said that it is time for he and his fellow warriors for Christ “to get up out of our prayer closet and put feet to our prayers.”

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/03/26/frc-president-tony-perkins-threatens-christian-uprising-if-supreme-court-legalizes-gay-marriage/

At a legislative session last week, there was a gun law brought up in committee. Debate and discussion ensued until Sen. Allen got her turn and drove the deliberation into loonyville. Even though the bill being debated  — a law to allow concealed carry in public buildings (what could possibly go wrong?) — dealt with guns, she somehow decided that she had to drag religion into the discussion.

And what a drag. You see, Sen. Allen has got it into her head that America needs a “moral rebirth”:

“Probably we should be debating a bill requiring every American to attend a church of their choice on Sunday to see if we can get back to having a moral rebirth. I believe what’s happening to our country is that there’s a moral erosion of the soul of America.”

She longs for those good old days of the 1950s. You know, when those pesky civil rights were non-existent. When the air was pure and the water sweet. When women were barefoot and pregnant and unicorns sat on rainbows. She apparently doesn’t follow that thought through and realize that she would never be a state senator in those days of yore.

When the Arizona Capitol Times spoke to Allen after the session (trying to understand what the heck she was thinking?), she told them:

“People prayed, people went to church. I remember on Sundays the stores were closed. The biggest thing is religion was kicked out of our public places, out of our schools.”

Um, Senator Allen, have you ever heard of a little document known as the Constitution? It expressly prohibits the sort of thing you’re promoting. From the wording of your statements, it’s clear that the “Church of their choice” is a Christian one. You probably don’t know this but those of the Jewish faith worship on Saturday. Muslims worship every day. Wiccans worship once a month (generally). But I’m sure that you don’t mean that those people should worship as they see fit. They should all convert to Christianity in your world.

You obviously don’t think that those other religions could possibly be moral. I guess you missed a recent study that showed religious people don’t have a monopoly on morality:

“… religious and nonreligious people commit similar numbers of moral acts. The same was found to be true for people on both ends of the political spectrum. And regardless of their political or religious leanings, participants were all found to be more likely to report committing, or being the target of, a moral act rather than an immoral act.”

Got that, Sen. Allen? Going to church doesn’t make you a good person. Being a good person makes you a good person. Oh, and using your position to try to make your son-in-law’s hijinks with female inmates in an Arizona prison go away? Yeah, that’s

On Oct. 9, 1870, after Napoleon’s fall, Chambord issued a proclamation inviting all of France to reunite under the Bourbons. The elections of 1870 returned only a minority of committed Republicans and, for a time, restoration seemed a real possibility. He was, however, hostile to the glories of the revolutionary past (as evidenced later in three publications, Mes idées [1872], Manifestes et programmes politiques, 1848–73 [1873], and De l’institution d’une régence [1874]), and his instinctive intransigence led him to declare that he would not become “legitimate king of the Revolution.” These views undermined even the support of the royalist-inclining president of the republic, Marshal Patrice de Mac-Mahon. A motion to restore the Bourbon monarchy was defeated in June 1874 in the National Assembly by a vote of 272 to 79, and on January 30 of the following year the republic was formally adopted by a slim margin of one vote. Chambord, who had come very near to fulfilling his claims, lived out the remainder of his life in exile.

Louis-Auguste-Victor, count de Ghaisnes de Bourmont,  (born Sept. 2, 1773, château de Bourmont, France—died Oct. 27, 1846, château de Bourmont), French soldier and politician, conqueror of Algiers (1830), for which he received the title of marshal of France.

He served the restored Louis XVIII (reigned 1814–24) in the French expedition to suppress an uprising in Spain (1823). Six years later he was appointed minister of war in the tottering government of the ultrarightist Prince de Polignac. In Algeria in 1830, Bourmont’s speedy conquest earned him a marshal’s baton. Refusing to support the “Citizen King” Louis-Philippe, he became implicated in the plots of the Duchess de Berry (1832) and went into exile in Portugal. There—as always on the side of absolutism—he aided the pretender Michael in the civil war of 1833–34. After the victory of the constitutional forces, he retired to Rome. He later returned under the amnesty of 1840 to France, where he remained a staunch supporter of the Bourbon pretender Henri, Count de Chambord.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/152424/dauphin

With little concern for the safety of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette, who were held captive in Paris, the Comte de Provence issued uncompromising counterrevolutionary manifestos, organized émigré associations, and sought the support of other monarchs in the fight against the Revolution. When the King and Queen were executed in 1793, he declared himself regent for his nephew, the dauphin Louis XVII, at whose death, in June 1795, he proclaimed himself Louis XVIII.

Between 1795 and 1814 Louis wandered throughout Europe, sojourning in Prussia, England, and Russia, promoting the royalist cause, however hopeless it seemed after Napoleon’s proclamation as emperor in 1804. Although financially hard pressed, he refused to abdicate and accept a pension from Bonaparte. After Napoleon’s defeats in 1813, Louis issued a manifesto in which he promised to recognize some of the results of the Revolution in a restored Bourbon regime. When the Allied armies entered Paris in March 1814, the brilliant diplomatist Talleyrand was able to negotiate the restoration, and on May 3, 1814, Louis was received with jubilation by the war-weary Parisians.

On May 2, Louis XVIII officially promised a constitutional monarchy, with a bicameral parliament, religious toleration, and constitutional rights for all citizens. The resulting Charte Constitutionnelle was adopted on June 4, 1814. Louis’s constitutional experiments were cut short, however, by the return of Napoleon from Elba. After Marshal Michel Ney defected to Napoleon on March 17, 1815, the King fled to Ghent. He did not return until July 8, after Waterloo.

Louis XVIII’s reign saw France’s first experiment in parliamentary government since the Revolution. The King was invested with executive powers and had “legislative initiative,” whereas a largely advisory parliament voted on laws and approved the budget. The legislature, though, had a strong right-wing, royalist majority. Influenced by his favourite, Élie Decazes, who became prime minister in 1819, the King opposed the extremism of the ultras, who were determined to wipe out every vestige of the Revolution, and he dissolved the parliament in September 1816. After 1820, however, the ultras exercised increasing control and thwarted most of Louis’s attempts to heal the wounds of the Revolution. At his death he was succeeded by his brother, the comte d’Artois, as Charles X.

https://rosamondpress.com/2013/01/03/illustrious-kindred-of-virginia-hambley/

Marie-Caroline de Bourbon-Sicile, duchess de Berry[1] (Maria Carolina Ferdinanda Luise; 5 November 1798 – 17 April 1870) was an Italian princess of the House of Bourbon who married into the French royal family, and was the mother of Henri, Count of Chambord, the last serious Bourbon pretender to the crown of France.

At birth, Henri was given the title of duc de Bordeaux. Because of his posthumous birth when the senior line of the House of Bourbon appeared about to become extinct, he was given the name Dieudonné (“God-given”). Royalists called him “the miracle child”.

In the early 1870s, as the Second Empire collapsed following its defeat in the Franco-Prussian War at the battle of Sedan on 1 September 1870, the royalists became a majority in the National Assembly. The Orléanists agreed to support the comte de Chambord’s claim to the throne, with the hope that at his death he would be succeeded by their own claimant, Philippe d’Orléans, comte de Paris. Henri was then pretender for both Legitimists and Orléanists, and the restoration of monarchy in France seemed to be a close possibility. However, Henri insisted that he would accept the crown only on condition that France abandon its tricolour flag and return to the use of the white fleur de lys flag. Even a compromise, whereby the fleur-de-lys would be the new king’s personal standard, and the tricolour would remain the national flag, was rejected.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleur-de-lis

A temporary Third Republic was established, to wait for Henri’s death and his replacement by the more liberal Comte de Paris. But by the time this occurred in 1883, public opinion had swung behind the Republic as the form of government which, in the words of the former President Adolphe Thiers, “divides us least”. Thus, Henri could be mockingly hailed by republicans such as Georges Clemenceau as “the French Washington” — the one man without whom the Republic could not have been founded.

Henri died on 24 August 1883 at his residence in Frohsdorf, Austria, at the age of sixty-two. He was buried in his grandfather Charles X’s crypt in the church of the Franciscan Kostanjevica Monastery in Gorizia, then Austria, now in Slovenian city of Nova Gorica.

Henri’s death left the Legitimist line of succession distinctly confused. On one hand, Henri himself had accepted that the head of the Maison de France (as distinguished from the Maison de Bourbon) would be the head of the Orléans line, i.e. the Comte de Paris. This was accepted by many Legitimists, and was the default on legal grounds; the only surviving Bourbon line more senior was the Spanish branch, which had renounced its right to inherit the throne of France as a condition of the Treaty of Utrecht. However, many if not most of Henri’s supporters, including his widow, chose to disregard his statements and this law, arguing that no one had the right to deny to the senior direct-male-line male Bourbon to be the head of the Maison de France and thus the legitimate King of France; the renunciation of the Spanish branch is under this interpretation illegitimate and therefore void. Thus these Legitimists settled on Juan, Count of Montizón, the Carlist pretender to the Spanish throne (the Salic law having been suspended in Spain, the actual king, Alfonso XII, was not the senior descendant in the male line), as their claimant to the French crown.

His personal property, including the château de Chambord, was left to his nephew, Robert I, Duke of Parma (son of Henri’s late sister).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri,_Count_of_Chambord

Patron of the arts[edit]

Even as member of the royal family, the Duchess of Berry was an exceptional theatre-goer. She was the patron of the Théâtre du Gymnase, which changed its name, for a time, to the théâtre de Madame, in her honor. She attended the Odéon at least nine times during 1824 to 1828. She contributed to benefit performances, such as that of Giacomo Rossini‘s La dame du lac (1826), for victims of the fire at Antonio Franconi‘s Cirque Olympique; she contributed 500 francs.[6]

La moisson (1822) by Auguste-Xavier Leprince, oil on canvas, 24.2 x 32.1 cm, featured in her 1822 sale

The Duchess of Berry and her first husband, Charles-Ferdinand d’Artois, were enthusiastic art collectors. Her sale of 1822 was novel for its catalogue which contained lithographic reproductions of all the works.[7][8] Lithography, invented by Alois Senefelder, had only been fully described in 1818 in Vollstandiges Lehrbuch der Steindruckerei, translated into French in 1819. The lithographs, produced by Isidore Laurent Deroy[9] sparked an interest in the technique as a means for reproducing art.[10]

She was a collector of landscapes; her collection featured at least three by Ruisdael.[11] She had several genre scenes by Auguste-Xavier Leprince[9] and she owned works by Jan van der Heyden,[12] Michel Philibert Genod,[13] François Marius Granet, Pauline Auzou, Jean-Claude Bonnefond, Charles Marie Bouton, Martin Drolling, Hortense Haudebourt-Lescot, and Achille Etna Michallon, among many others.[7]

The Duchess was known to patronise the Sèvres Porcelain Manufactory, commissioning notable works by Jean-Charles-François Leloy.[14]

About Royal Rosamond Press

I am an artist, a writer, and a theologian.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to America’s First Victory Over Terrorism

  1. Reblogged this on Rosamond Press and commented:

    I called Virginia tonight nnd found ut her mother was in town for the holidy. I said hello tp Elizabeth and her daughter said she loves me to.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.