Read The History

Submitted by Zaid Shakur (United States), Sep 25, 2007 at 12:39

Apparently David you didn't thoroughly read the sources you offered me. Though ARABS engaged in slavery, pious Muslims--such as the first three generations of Muslims, did not. African-American converts---or any converts to Islam, for that matter---do not use ARABS as our role models---we use PIOUS MUSLIMS. Find me evidence that Islam itself supports slavery or the trafficking thereof.

Show me proof that our religious role models, the pious first 3 generations of Muslims encouraged human trafficking? I don't care what Arabs do, Arabism is not a religion. Any Arabs claiming Islam as their religion who follow a forbidden path are just deviant Muslims, Arabs gone astray, and they are not the criteria by which to base the religion. Furthermore, if you'd read your own sources you would have noticed this interesting tidbit:

"Also, the Arab slave trade was not limited to people of certain color, ethnicity, or religion. In the early days of the Islamic state—during the 8th and 9th centuries—most of the slaves were Slavic Eastern Europeans (called Saqaliba), people from surrounding Mediterranean areas, Persians, Turks, other neighbouring Middle Eastern peoples, peoples from the Caucasus Mountain regions (such as Georgia and Armenia) and parts of Central Asia (including Mamluks), Berbers, and various other peoples of often predominatly Caucasoid origins as well as those of Black African origins."

Note that it does not say the "Muslim slave trade" Arabs account for only 17% of all Muslims worldwide. So David the difference bettween American chattel slavery and ARAB slave trading is entirely different. America exclusively targeted darker skin races, almost exclusively the African , to whip, beat, scourge and force into buiilding this country. It was a slavery made more insidious because it was built on the premise of WHITE SUPERIORITY OVER BLACK, thus justifying the evil and horrific treatment of fellow human beings. Whites subjegated their slaves because 'niggers needed to be civiliized". Blacks were exclusively de-humanized, portrayed as little more than talking apes so that if the toes or genitals of a runaway had to be 'excised", well heck they were'nt really human, right?

To summarize: a) There is no comparison between slavery Arab Slave trade and the American trans-atlantic slave holocaust.. 4% of all Arabs are Christians (they same ones opening liquor stores on every corner in the ghetto to ensure a drunken black population), so how many of them were slave holders? But because of their ethnicity you'd love to lump them with Muslims.

Moreover, Arabs make up a tiny poriton of the Muslim world. And if any Muslim---no matter who or where---does anything contary towhat The Holy Prophet outlined--then he is a deviant and can scarecly be called a good Muslim. Trafficking in human flesh for profit is among such deviancies And lastly, the ARABS who did traffic slaves did not do so out of some desire to decimate the African coast, though it may have been a result. They did the same to thier slavic states (in fact slave comes fromt the word 'slavic' ). But Good old Amerikkkan Chrisitans made black men and women their special target, their personal property, to abuse, rape and mutilate at will,

Why any nappy headed negro would call himself a Christian, praising a picture of a white Jesus after having been forcibly converted, escapes me entirely. Arabs didn't bomb the black churches in Misssiispi--good old Christian American neighbors did that.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".