There are much of literature in that topic and mainly from people who are against Islam,
When I looked to these literature, I believe that the writers are either really stupid and arrogant or they are really desperate to blame Islam of every thing wrong on this earth

One of these literatures is written by Donald Segal in his book Islam's Black Slavery
Where he wanted to put the blame on Islam
But he forgot the Slavery existed under the Christians, The Romans, before Islam

Let us come to the logic, because with logic people understand, I could bring records about Christianity involvement in black slavery until today in Africa and how western Christian country play the rule in making African countries slaves to them, but that would not help me or you, The reason you would say that I hate the West, which I don't, and I only repeat conspiracies, although I would put facts

Hence

My way of presenting my argument then is using logic that depends on facts from both histories Westerns (Christians) and Muslims

Slavery means: the activity of having slaves or the condition of being a slave
Slave means: a person who is legally owned by someone else and has to work for them
(Cambridge Advanced Dictionary)

Questions to be asked before attacking Islam:

1- had Slavery existed before Islam?
2- Is Islam the only religion that allowed Slavery?
3- Has Islam contributed to slavery, if yes, Positively or Negatively?
4- Compare to others was the slave in Muslim hand in a better life than in European hand?


Obviously the writers don't want to hear or think of such questions because Many Westerners with their biased view in Islam, attempt very hard to fake something bad and label Islam with it.

Let us come to the first question:
1- Did Slavery exist before Islam?
According to the world history that slavery existed before Islam, in fact it existed as early as history records,

The Greek had slaves, the Egyptians had the Jews and others as slaves
Arabs had slaves before Islam,
The Chinese Had Slaves
Africans among themselves had slaves,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

So Islam did not start the problem
2- Is Islam the only religion that allowed Slavery?
No, Judaism and Christianity had allowed it despite of some claims of some of Christian authors that Christianity did not allow slavery

You can see the review on the topic in
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satelli...d=1119503547546
I don't want to repeat the link but
http://www.answering-christianity.com
is a handy website

3- Has Islam contributed to slavery ?
Yes Islam contributed to slavery. However the contribution is very positive, that dealt with the issue in a way that amazes historians. That is why at the beginning of every book that islam's haters write on slavery they had to add that Islam has treated the slaves well and the Quraan spoke well of them, that is not because they are fair, but because they want to add some credibility to their works, and they cannot deny, because it provided the best solutions that no other religion or ideology had ever done so.

To verify that, we need to compare what was the condition of slaves before Islam and after Islam:
Before Islam
Enslaving can be done by different methods and there is no limited to them
The following are the common situations that a free person could become a slave:
a) The children of slaves are slaves, even if the father is a free man, unless the father himself freed the child
If a guy took from someone a loan and could not pay it back, the guy could end up being sold as a slave in order to pay the other guy his money
c) If a free man needed money he could sell one of his children as slave
d) In wars, if a tribe had lost a war in its own place, they could end up being enslaved, or at least their women would be captured and taken as slaves
e) Free people, especially children, could be taken from their tribe's place and then sold as slaves in another place where people don't know they are free

Under Islam,
All the situations above are eliminated except two
1- The child of slave is slave, unless the father is free man and he owns the slave woman
2- War, if Muslims engaged in legitimate war, between Muslims and non-Muslims, not between Muslims and Muslims then the captured female and children could end up being slaves

Therefore, Islam has limited the ways of enslaving

Then let us move to how Muslims free the slaves
The slaves under Islam had more rights than in any other civilization

No one could prove the opposite,
The people who hate Islam, whether they are Jews, or Neo-Cons, Catholics, or others, could not claim other than that because their own history is full of shame regarding this issue (may be Neo-cons don't have slaves, but they depend on the teaching of the old and new Testaments)

Under Islam, if a person had said to his slave that he is free even if he is joking, the slave is free,
The slave has the right to ask his owner to free himself, by buying himself
And guess what,
Part of Zakah is given to these slaves, So free men are obligatory had to pay for their release by paying Zakah

Do Christians or Jews have to pay for the freedom of slaves?
Or do they have in their holy books such limitation of enslaving people?

Furthermore, Islam had associated forgiveness with freeing slaves
Most big sins require the person to free a slave in order to have forgiveness, and in the Quraan it is written that if you could not find then do such and such, so the preference goes to freeing slaves.(and that there is indication in the Quraan that it will come time where there will be no slaves)
And so many encouraging Hadiths that talks about freeing the slaves
Such as The hadith where the Prohet of God says that these slaves are your brothers and Muslims should not overload them with things they could not bare

And when the Prophet of God saw a person beating his slave, the Prophet said
Fear God, and the man stopped and looked to his back and saw the Prophet,
The man then said he is free for the sake of Allah,
The Prophet said if you did not do that you would be in hell(for beating the slave)

Under Islam the person must treat slaves as humans, so the owner is obliged to pay the normal expenses to slaves from clothes, food, place to sleep and marriage.

In Islam there are sins that could be forgiven by asking forgiveness from God and never come back to them
And there are sins that you must do something specific in order for God to forgive
e.g. if someone killed another person, or having sex with his wife during the day of Ramadan…..etc.
This type of Forgiveness is called Kaffarah

For Kaffarah, Ulama had categorized Kaffarah into two types, One type that includes freeing slaves and the other is not,

The one that does not include slave is the things you must take care not to do during Hajj, for example, cutting hair from your body, or cutting your nails, or wearing perfume during Hajj
Or covering your head(for men) etc…

The other Kaffarah includes slaves, and it is further categorized into two types,
One the Kaffarah must be done by freeing slaves, (if there is a slave) if there isn't then other Kaffarah could be done

The other is a matter of choice, whether to free slaves or to do another Kaffarah

Did Moses or Jesus(Peace be up on them) do so ?
Therefore in terms of freeing the slaves and limiting slavery Islam is the best among the three Abrahamic religions

4- Compare to others was the slave in Muslim hand in a better life than in European hand?
Under Islam treatment of slaves is different than what the west treated its slaves,

Islam preserves the right that the slave is first a human being before anything else,

And the Prophet had said: " Your brothers are your servants- he meant the slaves- Allah has made them under your hands, so fear Allah when you treat them "

When you say such thing in front of Arabs who have great respect of ancestry and their tribal ties were/are very strong, it is a very brave step,

You might have not lived or passed by Saudi Arabia,
Here the Bedouin and many city people still preserve their ancestry line and they are very proud about it
To make Arabs believe that Allah sees every one is the same, the difference is their beliefs and deeds is a miracle itself,

However, the Prophet had done and made freed slaves to be equal to Arabs, not only this he made some freed slaves, whom ancestry not known, better than the non-Muslim Arabs

So Bilal who was a slave From Ethiopia is better than Abo Lahab the uncle of the Prophet who is from the finest families of Quraish, the most noble Arab tribe ( not to forget to mention that they are sons of Ishmail the son of Abraham, peace be upon them)

Not only that the Prophet had made a freed slave to marry a woman from Quraysh

Although the relationship did not succeed, but at least the Prophet had encouraged the woman to marry him, and that shows how Islam treats the slaves


In Islam the punishment of slaves is HALF the punishment of free man, unless it is a homicide
In Islam if someone stole and caught then his right hand is cut, the slaves are not

In Islam if someone drank alcohole , the punishment is 80 lashes the slave is 40
Etc……

In many Shariaa Law the killer of a slave is killed regardless of his freedom status, even if it’s the owner of the slave

Although slaves are not equated to free people e.g. Jumaah prayer is not compulsory nor Jihad
Even Hajj or Umrah the slaves has to take permission from the owner if the owner did not allow him Allah will not punish him for that

Under Islam Slaves had ruled for generations, they ruled in Egypt and in Northern India

I have not seen a slave became a president or a prime minister of any western country,
Even in South Africa ,Africans could not rule their own country until 1990s

This is just some examples of the fairness of Islam towards slaves

What Islam's haters want people to believe is that Islam is the reason of making Africans suffer until this day
That is why you can see that there are many works written by some Westerners who hate Islam claimed that Islam is responsible of enslaving some 280 million Africans Slaves ( that is how I remember the number could be more could be less ) Throughout the 1400 years,

However they also mention that during the 18th century the number of slaves had increase,

But isn't that the start of Westerners bringing the slaves into America and the latin America,
And isn't that the start of the Othmanic empire weakness and the start of colonization

These things are not mentioned clearly in these books so the reader assumes that it is because of Muslims the number of slaves increased

Another point I need to mention is that slavery had existed in Africa before Islam.

And when European came to West Africa and encouraged the nomads ( whether they are Arabs, Barbars, Africans) to enslave people, the Ulama Had issued a Fatwa Saying that it is prohibited to buy them since they could be free people


So here you go the Ulama had already issued a fatwa regarding the black slaves before Abraham Lincoln , The A'alem died in 1232 AH now we are in 1428 AH
The A'alem name is Ahmed Zeiny Dahlan, he was the Mufti of Shafiite in Makkah
And Abraham Linconl was born in 1809

The treatment of westerns was so different to Muslims
No slave was a ruler of free westerners

Not only that even after the slaves granted freedom they still considered lower than the white, their Church was different their grave yard was different their school is different Even their bars were different

In Islam there was not a single Mosque that claimed to be for slaves only or free people only,
Anyway under Islam once the slave is free he/ she becomes totally free

The Africans in America and in Africa itself had to suffer under the hands of White Westerners, who believed in Christianity for Century they were treated like animals in their own country,

In similar approach I could relate the suffering of Africa today to the Christian Colonization of Africa

What the Westerns did in 17th 18th 19th and until the late 20th centuries in Africa is not new
Their ancestors, the Romans, had done so in Egypt Libya Algeria Tunisia and Morocco


I would like to stop here
And I would like to apologies if I had hurt anyone with my words,
But really I was forced to write this article when a member quoted an article that blames Islam for African slavery, in Sexuality and Gender topic, sometimes ago

Regards
Defender

interesting read. thanks.

Interesting stuff. I heard from a couple of folks that in some cases the various African tribes had taken entire villages into slavery after battle, and then sold them to the Dutch traders. Too bad we even have to mention that it existed, imo.

Peace,

RadicalGnostic

A very good post and whoever reads it will benefit greatly.




Well, the Old Testament (Old Covenant) had many many many laws regulating slavery, and depending on the reason for the slave's enslavement they could pay for their freedom. In the New Testament (New Covenant), the practice of slavery is condemned. Christians are under the New Covenant (the Old Covenant is no more) so any 'Christians' that try to use the Bible to reinforce their pro-slavery views have to resort to verses in the Old Testament. These 'Christians' will ignore New Testament teachings and other Old Testament laws so they can say the Bible supports their already preconceived world views. I call these people 'Twistians'.


"We also know that law (Old Covenant) is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers–and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me." - 1 Timothy 1:10 (NIV)

(below- an excerpt from a letter from Paul to a fellow believer concerning one of his runaway slaves)
"Perhaps the reason he was separated from you for a little while was that you might have him back for good– no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother. He is very dear to me but even dearer to you, both as a man and as a brother in the Lord. So if you consider me a partner, welcome him as you would welcome me. If he has done you any wrong or owes you anything, charge it to me. I, Paul, am writing this with my own hand. I will pay it back–not to mention that you owe me your very self." - Philemon 1:15-19 (NIV)




Well, if you count Moses' freeing his people who were enslaved in Egypt then he freed a great deal.
If you count Christ Jesus as freeing the entire world from the slavery of sin, that's alot too.


But Moses did not run around freeing the slaves his own people made, and chances are you do not share all my views of Jesus. I will not argue against Islam being nice to slaves because you seem to know more about Islam than I do so I'll take your word for it. I do not feed off the fear that the media dispenses. While you do not hate western civilization, I do. The people really controlling my country have placed puppets in power who are self-proclaimed 'Christians' (to appeal to the masses). They have not only destroyed the country from the inside, but they have systematically destroyed it's reputation abroad and obliterated the reputation of all of Christianity with it. Many of these 'Christians' have written many books that blame everyone and everything else instead of the obvious corruption that is within. I do not accept that Islam is the 'fathers of slavery' or any other such nonsense, just as I don't accept that the Christians are either.

Thank you again for the wonderful post and I hope many read it and get educated on the subject.

Unfortunately slavery still goes on in the modern world. It crosses cultures and no single culture holds the blame. Here is some links on it.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa061202a.htm

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID...4A8809EC588EEDF

'Twistians'...I like it.

I've never saw this argument put forward? what i have seen on these boards is posters responding to Muslim threads criticising the west for the black African slave trade, the response is Islam was trading black African slaves long before the west and carried on a long time after the west stopped, which is true.
The main differences between Arab and white slave traders was the whites took predominately male's to work on the plantations, the Arabs took mainly women and children as sex slaves.
You talk of good and positive things of the slave trade, that's just a load of Islamic BS there's nothing good or positive where slavery's concerned.

Tbh, who really cares about the black african slave trade? It lasted what, 200 years? (sure it's bad, all slavery is)

Prior to this, for over 1000 years white people have been stolen, bought and forced into slavery - by both country and of pirates. The dutch and spanish even stole british from the coasts - which is one reason Charles 1st was hated as he was getting money for a navy, with no navy coming to be.

Never understood the commotion about the black african slave trade while there is none for the white slave trade - that is far older, heck look at Greece while in Spartan rule.

Also - to the OP - Islam is not really hated - and not due to it's past - but tension to the religion has hightened due to all the recent happenings that has brought peoples attention to Islam.

Hetrodexoly



It is interesting to say that with no proof,

Just to make things clear and clearing the truth from dust

In Islam if a guy had a slave female and had a child(wether it is baby boy/girl) from her, the lady is no longer a slave!!!!!!, the guy cannot sell her nor he could give her to someone else he either divorce her or marry her

Then the trade was not introduced by Islam or Muslims it was there before Islam,,,,,



Ofcourse there is:

Do say that the person who beats his slaves, and feed them with his animals and let him sleep with his animals, and never allow him to marry and freeing him almost impossible

As the person who is obligated by law to have the same clothes as his master the same food as his master a place to sleep(not with the animals) and the owner has to allow him to marry, and if the slave wants to get married the owner must find a way to get him married or the government well,

The slave under Islam is allowed to buy himself and set it free, by contract with the owner.

Regards,
Defender

And that makes it better... How? You're still trying to make owning another human okay. When it clearly isn't in this day and age.

A slave, is a slave, is a slave, and you as a Muslim are trying to justify it, and many Muslims aren't good, they rapped mutilated and tortured slaves, i could quote you passages from the bible on how christians should live there lives, but like Muslims few christians can live up to the book, so it would be pointless.

Oh gee that is nice, I wonder how many slaves earn enough money to buy themselves out of bondage. All men and women are born free from their first breath. I don't condone slavery in my faith or my country. You can't own another person it is illegal, at least here in the States it is.

this is where people keep messing up. being an arab doesn't makes a person a Muslim. Arab is a race. there are christians arabs, jewish arabs, muslims arabs.

My point of view from studying the slavery history:

- in the islamic history, slave is treated like how we treat the modern maids, drivers, butlers, gardeners. They respect them as humans. they don't go around calling them dogs nor whipped nor hang them nor drag them around with horses and vehicles.

- in the west however... we all know how that went down. too many movies, books, and all them coomerating holidays, and some of them still thinks the blacks are lower being. am I right?


as much as you think them Arabian Nights tales are true, it's not. the "harem" tales are mostly base from india you can't polygamised more that 4 wives and even that have rules.


and before I forgot, slavery started long before islam comes to view. and start differentiating race, culture and religion. they aren't the same.




oh gee... do you realize nobody slaves anyone anymore in the islamic world??? be realistic

I remeber a long time ago i read a book about a Prince of a tribe in Africa and he get's kid nap'd and has to go through all this stuff to get back to Africa but sad thing was after 45 Year's being a slave and sending letter's to the Goverment and USA which ingore him. He finaly contact'd Morocco and they got him back to Africa but he died when on first day in Africa not geting to even go back to his Tribe to see his wife or kids.

Reasons for low natural increase in the internal slave population

Harem pool with black eunuch slave. 19th century painting. Black slaves serving harems were desirably castrated 'level with the abdomen'.[66]According to Bernard Lewis, the growth of internal slave populations through natural increase was insufficient to maintain numbers right through to modern times, which contrasts markedly with rapidly rising slave populations in the New World. He writes that a contributing factor was the liberation of slaves as an act of piety, but the primary drain was the liberation by freemen of their own offspring born by slave mothers. Other factors Lewis describes for the low natural increase of slave populations in the Islamic world include:

Castration: A fair proportion of male slaves were imported as eunuchs. Levy states that according to the Qur'an and Islamic traditions, such emasculation was objectionable. Jurists such as al-Baydawi considered castration to be mutilation, stipulating law enforcement to prevent it. However, in practice, emasculation was frequent.[67] In nineteenth century Mecca, the majority of eunuchs were in the service of the mosques.[68]
Liberation of military slaves: Military slaves that rose through the ranks were usually liberated at some stage in their careers.
Restrictions on procreation: Among the menial, domestic, and manual worker slaves, casual mating was not permitted and marriage was not encouraged.
High death toll: There was a high death toll among all classes of slaves. Slaves usually came from remote places and, lacking immunities, died in large numbers. As late as the nineteenth century, Western travellers in North Africa and Egypt noted the high death rate among imported black slaves.[69]
Segal notes that recent slaves, weakened by their initial captivity and debilitating journey, would have been easy victim to climate changes and infection.[70] Children were especially at risk, and the Islamic market demand for children was much greater than the American one. Many blacks, both slave and free, lived in conditions conducive to malnutrition and disease, with effects on their own life expectancy, the fertility of women, and the infant mortality rate


Racist opinions occurred in the works of some historians and geographers: so in the 14th century CE Ibn Khaldun could write:

"...the Negro nations are, as a rule, submissive to slavery, because (Negroes) have little that is (essentially) human and possess attributes that are quite similar to those of dumb animals..."

However, Ibn Khaldun also wrote of the Arabs themselves:

:"they are the most savage human beings that exist. Compared with sedentary people, they are on a level with wild, untamable animals and dumb beasts of prey ... Arabs dominate only of the plains, because they are, by their savage nature, people of pillage and corruption. They pillage everything that they can take without fighting or taking risks, then flee to their refuge in the wilderness, and do not stand and do battle unless in self defence."[19]


Enslaved Africans were sold in the towns of the Muslim world. In 1416, al-Makrisi told how pilgrims coming from Takrur (near the Senegal river) had brought 1700 slaves with them to Mecca. In North Africa, the main slave markets were in Morocco, Algiers, Tripoli and Cairo. Sales were held in public places or in souks. Potential buyers made a careful examination of the "merchandise": they checked the state of health of a person who was often standing naked with wrists bound together. In Cairo, transactions involving eunuchs and concubines happened in private houses. Prices varied according to the slave's quality.[citation

The Arab slave trade from East Africa is one of the oldest slave trades, predating the European transatlantic slave trade by hundreds of years.[13]Male slaves who were often made eunuchs were employed as servants, soldiers, or laborers by their owners, while female slaves, mostly from Africa, were long traded to the Middle Eastern countries and kingdoms by Arab and Oriental traders, some as mainly female concubines and others as servants. Arab, African, and Oriental traders were involved in the capture and transport of slaves northward across the Sahara desert and the Indian Ocean region into the Middle East, Persia, and the Indian subcontinent. From approximately 650 AD until around 1900 AD. The Arab slave trade continued in one form or another into the early 1900s. Historical accounts and references to slave-owning nobility in Arabia, Yemen and elsewhere are frequent into the early 1920s.[14] In 1953, sheikhs from Qatar attending the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II included slaves in their retinues, and they did so again on another visit five years later.[15] Slavery in Mauritania was legally abolished by laws passed in 1905, 1961, and 1981, but it has never been criminalised, and several human rights organizations are reporting that the practice continues there.[16]


Africa: 8th through 19th centuries

13th century Africa - simplified map of the main states, kingdoms and empiresIn the 8th century AD, Africa was dominated by Arab-Berbers in the north: Islam moved southwards along the Nile and along the desert trails.

The Sahara was thinly populated. Nevertheless, since Antiquity there had been cities living on a trade in salt, gold, slaves, cloth, and on agriculture enabled by irrigation: Tahert, Oualata, Sijilmasa, Zaouila, and others. They were ruled by Arab, Berber, Fulani, Hausa and Tuaregs. Their independence was relative and depended on the power of the Maghrebi and Egyptian states.
In the Middle Ages, sub-Saharan Africa was called bilad -ul-Sûdân in Arabic, meaning land of the Blacks. It provided a pool of manual labour for North Africa and Saharan Africa. This region was dominated by certain states: the Ghana Empire, the Empire of Mali, the Kanem-Bornu Empire.
In eastern Africa, the coasts of the Red Sea and Indian Ocean were controlled by native Muslims, and Arabs were important as traders along the coasts. Nubia had been a "supply zone" for slaves since Antiquity. The Ethiopian coast, particularly the port of Massawa and Dahlak Archipelago, had long been a hub for the exportation of slaves from the interior, even in Aksumite times. The port and most coastal areas were largely Muslim, and the port itself was home to a number of Arab and Indian merchants.[21]

Slaves in eastern Africa - illustration from late 19th century)The Solomonic dynasty of Ethiopia often exported Nilotic slaves from their western borderland provinces, or from newly conquered or reconquered Muslim provinces. [22] Native muslim Ethiopian sultanates exported slaves as well, such as the sometimes independent Adal Sultanate.[23] On the coast of the Indian Ocean too, slave-trading posts were set up by Arabs and Persians. The archipelago of Zanzibar, along the coast of present-day Tanzania, is undoubtedly the most notorious example of these trading colonies. East Africa and the Indian Ocean continued as an important region for the Oriental slave trade up until the 19th century. Livingstone and Stanley were then the first Europeans to penetrate to the interior of the Congo basin and to discover the scale of slavery there. The Arab Tippo Tip extended his influence and made many people slaves. After Europeans had settled in the Gulf of Guinea, the trans-Saharan slave trade became less important. In Zanzibar,

Don't kid yourself slavery still goes on.

First of all I am not promoting slavery I merely defend Islam's position on it

Then As I said before there are western writers who hate Muslims that they fake up things and make as true,

Hetrodoxly's quotation of Bernard Lewis

Shows that Islam is practiced since there was liberation of slaves as an act of Piety

That shows how Muslims are humane
Unlike Christians who used to free slaves in order to use them in factories rather in farms
Another contrary is that the freed slave is free and is not treated as a second citizen as it used to be in the Christian world

Let us come to eunachs

What Islam has to do with this,

They are brought like that and as you mentioned the A'alem has given Fatwah prohibitying them of doing that

I mean I cann't imagine how much you hate Islam that you blame Islam for somehting that has nothing to do with,

In fact its Ulama and Scholars had/ and still have discourage such an act

When I go to Makkah or Madinah, these eunachs have special treatment, they set in a special place and receive salary from the government ( however they are old people)


The time you can blame Islam for such an act is when Islam encourages such an act

If you took your logic and apply to the Christian world

Christianity is the reason for the holocoust

Massacring the red Indians in millions
the africans in millions
the aboriginies in hundreds of thousands
the Muslims in Spain in hundreds of thousands

They are the reason for suffering of almost every nation around the world apart of themselves

I cannt recall a country that did not suffer from Christians ( apart of western nation)

Despite that I don't blame Christianity for that

I blame Christians

Regarding Ibn Khaldon

You must also note that although ibn Khaldon is an Arab and not barbar he traced his ancestory to Hadhramot, east Yemen

he also criticized Arabs and call them savage and he gave Mousel and Koufa in Iraq as an example to his statement

Although Ulama and different historian scholars rejected his statement


But here you go he also accused Arabs of being Savage

he was not biased he wrote what he concluded from his observations


Now let us come to Sudan

Since Sudan is the largest country in Africa and it is Muslim country the westerns don't hesitate to put it on its first agenda to attack

First the west wanted the southern Sudan to be separated so they tried to arm the southern Sudanese

What do you expect Sudan Government to do??

Now they went to Darfur

And that is the start of the war in Darfur

When Western countries armed the Darfurian separatists

I don't support the Sudanese Government in its handling of the Darfurian crisis however,

I insist that if the west left Sudan alone it would be a better place to live in

Regarding the slaves

how could I trust Western NGOs when they are powered by their governments who want to steal Our natural resources?


Finally
Are Arabs free from Racism towards Black??

No, there are Arabs who are racist to anyone who is not an Arab whether they are blacks or whites


For example when I ask my Arab Friends do you have black slaves they say: God forbid that!!!

When I ask them for explanation they say that they could not be trusted and they had a very bad experience with their friendship

So the people who are racist to black have a reason for not associating with them, it is not their color it is their attitude

However, they don't mind to have African friends but they say the loyal among them is 1/100

As myself I don't mind dealing with them and I did not have a chance to have a friendship with them

Althouhg my cousins have

I am an Arab however, my great great great grandmother was from Africa

My father's cousin's mother is from Ughanda

And I consider him as other uncles despite of his color

Therefore, there is a different between our racism and your racism, our racism based on attitude more than color,

Where your racism is based on color

My grand father married four one of them was a slave he bought form my great grand father and I have two aunts form her

Both of my aunts married Arabs who don't have african blood, and they, their husbands, were both from Quraiysh


Regards,

Defender

When did Islam start? That ends your questioning right there.
First, figure out when Islam started. You probably can't.

Is it wrong to own Slaves?

I don't think so. Is it wrong for Joe Blo to be a factory worker so that he can earn money to buy food and clothing? Is it wrong for master George Washington to have homes for people on his property and have the dwellers work in his cotton fields so they can earn money to eat and buy clothing and stuff?

It would be helpful if people could kindly provide the links for their cut n paste jobbies

I always do.

It's worse than i thought.



http://aolsearch.aol.co.uk/aol/redir?src=e...tion=WebResults

Slaves don't earn money... Kinda hard to buy things when you work for nothing - and no, not volunteer work,

What?

Joe Blo in the factory can quit and get another job it he wants, join a union. He can also go to college at night and improve his life that way. Modern slavery isn't like Gone With the Wind. It is like children and women being sold as sex slaves, it is men and women when they get sick and can't work or the owner doesn't need them any they are killed.
Don't say not in my courtry or my culture slavery is everywhere, in my little town in Florida they busted up a sex slave house not long ago. http://www.iabolish.org/slavery_today/news/index.html

Well Hetrodoxly again you went wrong in bringing this issue up

You blame Islam for what Muslims did, or accused of

Just to keep you enlightened about how Muslims attacked

Look at Bosnia Kosovo Chechen the Muslims in China although the government now tries to be more friendly with them since the oil of China is mainly there

and see the Muslims in India

Muslims in India are being attacked by false claims




I would like to search for a book named

(All Hindus Wake Up) to Dr. R. Singh


and see how much some Hindus hate Muslims


It is logical to note that if Muslims wanted to make the whole of India to be Muslims they would have done so, they have ruled India for More than 900 years and if they wanted to kill them then it was not impossible for them to do so

I don't say that there was not mistakes done by some rulers but seriously if all Muslim rulers had a goal to apolish Hinduism they would have done it

Some of Hindu writers bring fake tales to fill Children's minds with hatered towards Islam and Muslims,

The reason is very very obvious

Since Hinduism is based on racism and there are many non-comprehendable things in its teaching, and now with the oppenness

Some of the upper class hindus feared that Hindus (especially from the lower classes) would turn to Islam as their refuge

The reason they are more scared from Islam than Christianity is the fact there is already a large number of Muslims in the country and their daily contact may lead to many Hindus in accepting Islam

then India's first enemy is Pakistan and it is a Muslim country

Imagine if Muslims become half of the population what would happen to the political stream and to India itself

It would be a desaster for hindus' Leaders


Later I will be writing why Islam did accept slavery and was it fair or not


Regards,

Defender

I think it was you that brought it up?

Islam as tried many time's by force to convert hindus, but their no pushover has you suggest and probably braver than your average muslim.


Your right if half of India became muslim it would be a disaster.


Your doing exactly what you claim others have said about Islam, you criticise other religions and are extremely racist of the followers of these religions, i suppose your just your average muslim.

Islam did not try to force convert anyone, some Muslim leaders, and they are very few, who tried to convert by force

and one of them was Tamerlane

and Tamerlane if you had just search about is from a Turkic-Mongol tribe which proudly says that they have the same as Gengis Khan blood,

Something else, his father was the first man of his tribe to convert to Islam

Thus there way of war was taken from their barbaric strategies of wars

and hence I was not surprized about what he did,

it was not the teaching of Islam that led him to massacre rather his mongolian inhereted mind-set


You say that the Hindus were braver than Muslims

What a joke



Just refer to the history of Muslims and you will see who is braver



Again,,,, As I said

If Muslims wanted to destroy Hinduism by force we would have DONE it

The aim of Muslims is to introduce Islam if accepted that is good if not, it is up to him/her

and that was practiced throughout the 1400 years, if there are exceptions there are few


And same wise if Muslims wanted to destroy Christianity and Judaism in Middle east they would have done it


Just compare between Alandalus and Egypt

Muslims Ruled Egypt for 1400 years, yet 10% of Egyptians are still Christians

Christians Ruled Alandalus for only 500 year,after Muslims had entered it, yet there is not a single Muslim whose ancestors remained Muslims in Spain throughout the 500 years

Same things goes for Syria Lebanon, Palestine, Yemen,, India...... and Iran

not to forget that there are people who worship fire in Iran until today, that was the religion of Persian before Islam, in fact I have met one of them

If Muslims wanted to destroy them they would have done so.....



I don't say that people should not criticized Islam,

I say people should read and educate themselves before criticizing

something else,

I need to show the difference between Islam and Christianity or any other religion as Arabs old saying says " By knowing the opposite things are known"

Regards,

Defender

Defender

I think it is pretty rude that you would make claims which religious follower is 'braver' than the other. Islam is NOT about that, and you know it. We have enough misrepresented interpretation without muslims adding to it. Muslims are no better than Hindus, Christians, or the Jewish. There is no point of a contest.

And, no, Muslims in the beginning of Islam or now could never overthrow Christianity or any other religion. There is no compulsion in our religion, forcing Islam on anyone is forbidden. Are you forgetting they worship the same god we do, and are called the people of the book in the Qur'an?

If Muslims then where humane about releasing slaves out of 'piety' I'd hate to see what inhumane is.

Slavery is WRONG period. Wrong wrong wrong. Slavery may have been practiced then, but it doesn't make it right, nor the need to be defended in todays society.

Short, sweet, and to the point.

Matthew 7:15-20 "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.

Firuz Shah Tughlaq
Firuz Shah Tughluq was the third ruler of the Tughlaq dynasty of the Delhi Sultanate. The "Tarikh-i-Firuz Shah" is a historical record written during his reign that attests to the systematic persecution of Hindus under his rule. In particular, it records atrocities on Hindu Brahmin priests who refused to convert to Islam:





Mahmud of Ghazni
Mahmud of Ghazni was an Afghan Sultan who invaded the Indian subcontinent during the early 11th century. His campaigns across the gangetic plains are often cited for their iconoclastic and plundering targeting of Hindu temples such as those at Mathura and looked upon them as "jihad"

Pradyumna Prasad Karan further describes Mahmud invasion as one of putting "thousands of Hindu's to the sword" and making a pastime of "raising pyramids of the skulls of the infidels".Holt et al. hold an opposing view, that he was "no mere robber or bloody thirsty tyrant" . Mahmud shed no blood "except in the exegencies of war",and was tolerant in dealings with his own Hindu subjects, some of whom rose to high posts in his administration, such as his Hindu General Tilak



Mahmud of Ghazni sacked the second Somnath Temple in 1026, and looted it of gems and precious stones and the famous Shiva lingam of the temple was destroyed and it's fragments taken away to Ghazni where they were used as stepping stones of a mosque.


In the Delhi Sultanate
The first Muslim Empire of India, the Sultanate of Delhi, was established in 1210 CE by Turkic tribes that invaded the subcontinent from Afghanistan. Many temples were looted and destroyed. Infamous cases are the destruction of the Somnath.

Muhammad Ghori
Muhammad Ghori conducted genocide of Hindus at Koi (modern Aligarh), Kalinjar and Varanasi, according to Hasan Nizami's Taj-ul-Maasir, 20,000 Hindu prisoners were slaughtered and their heads offered to crows.


Qutb-ud-din Aibak
Historical records compiled by Muslim historian Maulana Hakim Saiyid Abdul Hai attest to the iconoclasm of Qutb-ud-din Aybak. The first mosque built in Delhi, the "Quwwat al-Islam" was built after demolishing the Hindu temple built previously by Prithvi Raj and leaving certain parts of the temple outside the mosque proper . This pattern of iconoclasm was common during his reign, although an argument goes that such iconoclasm was motivated more by politics than by religion.


Iltutmish
Another ruler of the sultanate, Shams-ud-din Iltutmish, conquered and subjugated the Hindu pilgrimage site Varanasi in the 11th century and had continued the destruction of Hindu temples and idols that had begun under the first attack in 1194.



Vijayanagara
Main article: Vijayanagara
The city flourished between the 14th century and 16th century, during the height of the Vijayanagar Empire. During this time, it was often in conflict with the kingdoms which rose in the Northern Deccan, and which are often collectively termed the Deccan Sultanates. The period saw brutalities from the Muslim Side. In 1565, the empire's armies suffered a massive and catastrophic defeat at by an alliance of the Sultanates, and the capital was taken. The victorious armies then razed, depopulated and destroyed the city over several months. The empire continued in slow decline, but the original capital was not reoccupied or rebuilt.



In the Mughal empire
The Mughal Empire was marked by periods of tolerance of non-Muslims, such as Hindus, Christians and Sikhs, as well as violent oppression and persecution of those people.The reign of Aurangzeb was particularly brutal. No aspect of Aurangzeb's reign is more cited - or more controversial - than the numerous desecrations and destruction of Hindu temples. Aurangzeb banned Diwali, placed a jizya (tax) on non-Muslims and matyred the ninth Sikh guru Tegh Bahadur. The confrontation with the Sikhs took Aurangzeb and his henchmen an endless series of atrocities against Sikhs which included torturous execution of several Sikhs including the eight and ten years old sons of Guru Gobind Singh by alive-burial.

During his reign, tens of thousands of temples were desecrated: facades and interiors were defaced and their murtis (divine images) looted. In many cases, temples were destroyed entirely; in numerous instances mosques were built on their foundations, sometimes using the same stones. Among the temples Aurangzeb destroyed were two most sacred to Hindus, in Varanasi and Mathura. In both cases, he had large mosques built on the sites.

The Kesava Deo temple in Mathura, marked the place Hindus believe was the birth place of Shri Krishna. In 1661 Aurangzeb ordered the demolition of the temple, and constructed the Katra Masjid mosque. Traces of the ancient Hindu temple can be seen from the back of the mosque. Aurangzeb also destroyed what was the most famous temple in Varanasi- the Vishwanath Temple. The temple had changed location over the years, but in 1585 Akbar had authorized its location at Gyan Vapi. Aurangzeb ordered its demolition in 1669 and constructed a mosque on the site, whose minarets stand 71 metres above the Ganges. Traces of the old temple can be seen behind the mosque. Centuries later, emotional debate about these wanton acts of cultural desecration continue. Aurangzeb also destroyed the Somnath temple in 1706.

According the Hindu claims the Mughals supposedly also destroyed the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, at the birthplace of the Hindu deity Rama. On top of it, they built the Babri Masjid, which has since been a source of tensiosn between the Hindu and Muslim communities.



During the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities there were widespread killings and ethnic cleansing of civilians in Bangladesh (then East Pakistan under Pakistani occupation), and widespread violations of human rights carried out by the Pakistan Army, which was supported by political and religious militias during the Bangladesh Liberation War. In Bangladesh, the atrocities are identified as a genocide, which is disputed by Pakistan. Many of the victims were Hindus, and the total death toll was in the millions[42] [43].TIME magazine reported that "The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Muslim military hatred."[44]


[edit] Masih incident
On June 29, 2005, police in Nowshera, NWFP, arrested Christian janitor Yousaf Masih on blasphemy charges. Witnesses claimed Masih had burned pages of the Qur'an while disposing of trash for his employer. Following his arrest, a mob of between 300 and 500 protesters destroyed a Hindu temple and houses belonging to Christian and Hindu families in the city. While police arrested some perpetrators after the fact, under the terms of a deal negotiated between Islamic religious leaders and the Hindu/Christian communities, police released all of them without charge. Police released Masih from custody on bail on August 6, 2005[45].


Forced Conversions
Forced and coerced conversions of religious minorities to Islam occurred at the hands of societal actors. Religious minorities claimed that government actions to stem the problem were inadequate. Several human rights groups have highlighted the increased phenomenon of Hindu girls, particularly in Karachi, being kidnapped from their families and forced to convert to Islam.[citation needed]

Hindu women have also been known to be victims of kidnapping and forced conversion to Islam. Krishan Bheel, a Hindu member of the National Assembly of Pakistan, came into news recently for manhandling Qari Gul Rehman.

On October 18, 2005, Sanno Amra and Champa, a Hindu couple residing in the Punjab Colony, Karachi, Sindh returned home to find that their three teenage daughters had disappeared. After inquiries to the local police, the couple discovered that their daughters had been taken to a local madrassah, had been converted to Islam, and were denied unsupervised contact with their parents


Temple Destruction
Several Hindu temples have been destroyed in Pakistan. A notable incident was the destruction of the Ramna Kali Mandir in former East Pakistan. The temple was bulldozed by the Pakistan Army on March 27, 1971.The Dhakeshwari Temple was severely damaged during the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, and over half of the temple's buildings were destroyed. The main worship hall was taken over by the Pakistan Army and used as an ammunitions storage area. Several of the temple custodians were tortured and killed by the Army though most, including the Head Priest, fled to their ancestral villages and to India and therefore escaped death.

In 2006, the last Hindu temple in Lahore was destroyed to pave the way for construction of a multi-storied commercial building. The temple was demolished after officials of the Evacuee Property Trust Board concealed facts from the board chairman about the nature of the building. When reporters from Pakistan-based newspaper Dawn tried to cover the incident, they were accosted by the henchmen of the property developer, who denied that a Hindu temple existed at the site[48].

Several political parties in Pakistan have objected to this move, such as the Pakistan People's party and the Pakistani Muslim League-N[49][50]. The move has also evoked strong condemnation from in India from minority bodies and political parties, including the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the Congress Party, as well as Muslim advocacy political parties such as the All India Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat[51]. A firm of lawyers representing the Hindu minority has approached the Lahore High Court seeking a directive to the builders to stop the construction of the commercial plaza and reconstruct the temple at the site. The petitioners maintain that the demolition violates section 295 of the Pakistan Penal Code prohibiting the demolition of places of worship [52

I'm probably at a disadvantage, the majority of Muslims i meet in the UK originate from Pakistan and i've yet to meet a brave one.

Peace

I think that it is propaganda, politics and people exceeding limits...falling outside of Islam that has heightened tensions...I think that the political arena has an agenda and that Islam being made into the new 'bogie man' is necessary for them to do that. Each raid, attack etc seems to result in countless arrests...which at a later date result in release without charge...but the hystrionics that arise at the period of arrest linger much longer than the non-guilt of the people.

Islam isn't dangerous or a threat, but, those with an agenda in politics, and those with hate in their hearts who need a cause to justify their violence have all hi-jacked Islam. That is a terrible consequence of the worst of humanity who seek to persecute the noble acts and intentions of many people who strive to live their lives according to what God dictates.

In my opinion anyway.

heterodoxly

what you bring I can answer it simply by quoting you



(I don't know what you exactly meant by saying brave, but since I brought the brave word in the context of war then I understood that you meant Pakistanis don't fight or they don't pully White Britons)
Explanation:

You are saying that because the Hindus were brave Muslims could not force them to islam

But you need to know that when the power is with the hands of others you cannt be brave otherwise you will be killed or sacked,,

If you go to Pakistan or any other country you will not be brave unless you are dumb ( brave in this context is explained before "Explanation")

Samewise the Hindus, the Hindus might be brave, but when they were won and taken over I don't think they will be brave because they would all be killed

I don't say there has not been a mass murder but it was not for every hindu,

after all they were considered "Themmies" by Most Indian Muslim Rulers

Regards,

Defender

Perhaps islam is being heavily associated with slavery being nations in the middle east were some of the last to emancipate their slaves. Saudi arabi didn't do it until the 1960's. I can't see how the islam world is any more guilty starting black slavery than any other people, prolonging it maybe, but not starting it.
Plus it is fashionable to be anti-islamic at the moment.

Hetro, I see you and some others, even muslims, are mixin up some things here. Islam, muslim, and nationality are three different things.
If you see or know something about a Pakistani muslim you can not equilize it with all other muslims. Is there not a difference between a christian from England and a christian from Germany?
How about a white english convert to Islam? Do you think that he or she has the same values like a muslim from Iran or Pakistan or Egypt?

I said it before, if you refere to someone or a group of people please list a name and the origin. How would you feel if all christians or pagan or jews would be called up because someone from their midst did something wrong?

According to your posts and if I would react accordingly, then all Germans should be killed of what they have done to Jews, all Serbs should be killed because of what the did in the Yougoslav wars???

All those kriminals used Jesus' name during the killings so all Christians began atrocities?????

Name, origin, nationality and race please from the individual. It is alway individuals or small groups never a nation, religion, race.

Defender I can't for the life of me think why many people are wary of the 'cult mentality' of some muslim extremists.
http://www.sabiqun.net/join.html
I'm not suggesting you should join up but you should be aware that many extremist Muslims are among the most intolerant,bigotted sexist,prejudiced,brainwashed,indoctrinated,conditioned people alive in the world today (with the exception of a few Christian extremists).
I'd be interested in your views on the video above (over on the scepticism vs spirituality board).
As for your post,Im trying to be objective but do not agree -Wahhabi Islam enslaves far more people than it liberates.

I don't think that Islam actually gives a green light to slavery, I think Islam was actually giving it a yellow light. Islam made so many laws and regulations concerning slavery is a simple sign (if you can identify), that slavery is actually not a healthy lifestyle or whatever you may call it. Islam gave so many rules which most of them addressed to the slave owner. Therefore, slavery is not a fine thing that can be justified so easily even in the times of Prophet Mohammed, the time where most laws of Islam was born. For me slavery is just wrong...but then again, without slavery (like in Brazil), I probably wouldn't do what I'm doing almost daily and what have become my love and even a part my username, Capoeira. But no, even the slaves in Brazil uses Capoeira to free themselves from slavery, so it's a basic ideal that everyone deserves freedom, and Islam gave so many regulations to the slave owners. Besides, in a Jummah Khutbah I heard one day, one of the reasons why Islam gave so many regulations of slavery and even considering slaves as a brother, is because of the spreading of the Islamic Sharia', and it did worked well, also, that's what I've actually read on a book titled "Civilization" (I dunno who wrote the book. I'll try to post it once I got it).

Hetrodoxly, I respect your belief, but please, your act of attacking Islam has gone awry, you've attacked races, tribes, nations and peoples way beyond Islam. Because not ALL people, even in an Islamic coutry is a Moslem. Remember that.

Defender, please stop telling everyone about how "brave" the Moslems are. It's not about bravery, it's about how we life in a balance. You have crossed the basic idea of Islam and..the hip hop which is: Peace. Islam literally means to life peacefully under the God. Attacking other people is wrong in Islam, we may only defend, but not attack. And we must defend ourselves smartly, because the Prophet Mohammed has warned us all, "Iqra' !!". Read and learn is the best way to overcome the threat.

And I agree, all these hatred for Islam is because the heightened situations of the world lately after the 911 events which I consider it a black day for Islam and Moslem everywhere. These are the days where being a Moslem is a dangerous life...sadly.

Great Post. Right to the point.

Is this really a thread about which religions' version of slavery was "better"? Wow.

Why have you dragged this back up? i'm not going to read back through the posts to see what context i used it in, but my experience of Pakistani muslims in the UK is they attack people in gangs they appear to be very cowardly.
what we see daily on the TV makes muslims lives look cheap, being cowardly and having no honour.