(untitled)
![(untitled). . EUROPEAN [[flol/]. Then start by sharing the blame for black slavery, as Arab Muslims participated in that trade as much as white Christian Europeans did.](http://2static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Untitled_e1ebab_5794121.jpg "(untitled)")
EUROPEAN [[flol/]
...
| |
Anonymous comments allowed.
68 comments displayed.
#49 to #21
-
cognosceteipsum ONLINE (01/10/2016) [-] What's funny is that, Germany is one of the few places where being 'German' is considered a cultural thing, so yeah
#28 to #21
-
anon (01/10/2016) [-]
As an American of German descent, the Economist can go **** themselves. German is my ******* heritage, my ******* cultural, my ******* past time. It doesn't belong to a bunch of immigrants who want to live there. German is the culture and the history of the people that created it, fought for it, died for it and built it. Now I'm expected to hand over my family's legacy and the future of my countrymen to somebody else? Germans are white. I bet the Economist wouldn't call white people who were born and raised in Africa Africans and demand that the Africans forfeit their heritage just to appease those who choose to live there.
**** this. **** them. They may be German citizens/nationals, but they WILL NEVER BE ******* GERMAN!
**** this. **** them. They may be German citizens/nationals, but they WILL NEVER BE ******* GERMAN!
#2
-
vlf (01/09/2016) [-]
Then start by sharing the blame for black slavery, as Arab Muslims participated in that trade as much as white Christian Europeans did.
#24 to #2
-
runescapewasgood (01/10/2016) [-] except it didn't create a lasting system of discrimination that still exists today
and they still treated them like humans
and they still treated them like humans
#25 to #24
-
runescapewasgood (01/10/2016) [-] not to mention that they heavily looked down upon slavery (and it was purely for economic reasons), and they had many religious ways in which slaves could obtain freedom, and they were required to be treated humanely, and had legal rights.
none of these things were present in the west. in fact, religion was used to support and promote slavery. not to mention the fact that slavery only actually ended in the west for purely political reasons, as opposed to moral ones
none of these things were present in the west. in fact, religion was used to support and promote slavery. not to mention the fact that slavery only actually ended in the west for purely political reasons, as opposed to moral ones
#35 to #34
-
runescapewasgood (01/10/2016) [-] i can quote a history textbook i read saying women are equal before god (this history textbook not being from people with a pro-muslim bias), and i can quote various islamic scholars saying they are equal before god.
every society has patriarchal tendencies, and i'm not denying that. women are equal, however, before god in islam, just as women and men are equal before the law in america.
case closed.
every society has patriarchal tendencies, and i'm not denying that. women are equal, however, before god in islam, just as women and men are equal before the law in america.
case closed.
#37 to #35
-
runescapewasgood (01/10/2016) [-] >when people downthumb your comments but cant make a legitimate argument against you. they just think ur wrong because they want to. that public bandwagon tho
#43 to #39
-
runescapewasgood (01/10/2016) [-] i rest my case. illogical hatred based upon bandwagon ideals of people that don't choose to think for themselves. i'm done here.
#45 to #43
-
blackrunner (01/10/2016) [-] Shut up you ********** lover. Go marry a goat or gangrape a toddler if you love *********** so much.
#52 to #43
-
nobleknight (01/10/2016) [-] So all those peace loving muslims who rape women then stone them because they are whores for being raped are actually saying women are equal? Are you mad? These are the people who say "Islam is a peaceful religion and behead those who say otherwise" (surmising at that point). What Islam may have been in the past is no longer the case now because it has devolved into a barbaric religion of hatred, aimed at outsiders, women, and even hatred of their fellow muslims. Hell look what happened in Germany where "refugees" started raping so many women and at least 13 refugees were arrested for committing the rapes. All over Europe Muslims are attacking people, sexually assaulting people, killing people, and generally trashing the place all in the name of Allah. Face it, Islam is nothing more than an excuse to do what you want and to kill those who disagree.
#60 to #52
-
anon (01/10/2016) [-]
stopped reading at the first line because premarital sex is haram, so by nature rape is haram. not to mention that if a guy rapes someone, pretty sure he's either exiled or killed, while the woman gets no punishment.
have a nice day and try not to hop on that bandwagon so hard. you might break it.
have a nice day and try not to hop on that bandwagon so hard. you might break it.
#62 to #60
-
nobleknight (01/10/2016) [-]
So funny when that goes against everything women and others have said.
#46 to #37
-
anon (01/10/2016) [-]
Or could it be due to the fact that you presented no arguments, only assertions? People do not have time to debunk all the misinformation they see, only to be ignored by people with industrial lever confirmation bias. Absence of counter-argument does not imply validity of your argument.
#53 to #35
-
anon (01/10/2016) [-]
the quran calls women inferior to men tho
Surah 4:34 Men are managers of the affairs of women because Allah has made the one superior to the other
plus, a woman only gets half of what a man does when it comes to inheritance affairs. plus, a womans testinmony is worth half of a man's.
and nevermind that you are allowed to beat your wife if she doesn't listen to you, muhammad beat his wife aisha one time so hard that she admitted that he harmed her, and he let a man beat his wife because she didn't listen to her husband.
Surah 4:34 Men are managers of the affairs of women because Allah has made the one superior to the other
plus, a woman only gets half of what a man does when it comes to inheritance affairs. plus, a womans testinmony is worth half of a man's.
and nevermind that you are allowed to beat your wife if she doesn't listen to you, muhammad beat his wife aisha one time so hard that she admitted that he harmed her, and he let a man beat his wife because she didn't listen to her husband.
#58 to #53
-
anon (01/10/2016) [-]
>>#54
already answered this a thousand times
Generally, the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) used to discourage his followers from taking even this measure. He never hit any female, and he used to say that the best of men are those who do not hit their wives. In one Hadith he expressed his extreme repulsion from this behavior and said, "How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then embrace (sleep with) her?” (Al-Bukhari, English Translation, vol. 8, Hadith 68, pp. 42-43) www.islamicfinder.org/articles/article.php?id=307
" [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them."
1. Talk it out with them
2. If there's no effect, don't sleep with them.
3. Strike them (LIGHTLY - CAUSING NO VISIBLE SIGNS)
This is in the scenario of the mental cruelty of verbal abuse on the part of the wife. "Nachiz" also means that the woman exalts herself, while putting down her husband.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydkIOXBjZY8&feature=youtu.be
Men are the protectors and maintainers of women
Men are the guardians of women
Because Allah has made them to excel the other
Because they have made one stronger than the other
So righteous women are devoutly obedient (to Allah)
www.quranicpath.com/misconceptions/obeying_husbands.html
www.islamtomorrow.com/articles/women_treatment.htm
corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=34
www.alislam.org/quran/tafseer/?page=518®ion=E1&CR=EN,E2&CR=EN,E2
(this are all copypasted responses from my prevous answers, i can look into it more if you want)
by the way cute blocking me
already answered this a thousand times
Generally, the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) used to discourage his followers from taking even this measure. He never hit any female, and he used to say that the best of men are those who do not hit their wives. In one Hadith he expressed his extreme repulsion from this behavior and said, "How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then embrace (sleep with) her?” (Al-Bukhari, English Translation, vol. 8, Hadith 68, pp. 42-43) www.islamicfinder.org/articles/article.php?id=307
" [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them."
1. Talk it out with them
2. If there's no effect, don't sleep with them.
3. Strike them (LIGHTLY - CAUSING NO VISIBLE SIGNS)
This is in the scenario of the mental cruelty of verbal abuse on the part of the wife. "Nachiz" also means that the woman exalts herself, while putting down her husband.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydkIOXBjZY8&feature=youtu.be
Men are the protectors and maintainers of women
Men are the guardians of women
Because Allah has made them to excel the other
Because they have made one stronger than the other
So righteous women are devoutly obedient (to Allah)
www.quranicpath.com/misconceptions/obeying_husbands.html
www.islamtomorrow.com/articles/women_treatment.htm
corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=34
www.alislam.org/quran/tafseer/?page=518®ion=E1&CR=EN,E2&CR=EN,E2
(this are all copypasted responses from my prevous answers, i can look into it more if you want)
by the way cute blocking me
#63 to #58
-
gider (01/10/2016) [-] Well, Sahih Muslim (4:2127) Muhammad struck his favorite wife, Aisha, in the chest one evening when she left the house without his permission. Aisha narrates, "He struck me on the chest which caused me pain."
So, he did hit Aisha which caused enough pain that she reacted on it
Bukhari Book 7 Volume 72 Hadith 715
Narrated 'Ikrima:
Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon 'AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. 'Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, 'Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" When 'AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, 'Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa'a." Allah's Apostle said, to her, "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa'a unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you." Then the Prophet saw two boys with 'Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that 'AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"
And here he let's a man beat his wife since she doesn't love him. I also like how Aisha says "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing woman". You say that you are to beat your wife so that you can't see the damage, but AbdurRahman beat his wife so that her skin turned greener than her dress and Muhammad said nothing against this.
Linking me to people who answer if you are allowed to beat you wife by examining Arabic grammar is sorta pointless, since I do not know Arabic, and can't check the fact out on my own without knowing Arabic myself.
I've given you two hadiths, one who is Bukhari and one who is Muslim, both whom are the most authentic ones you can get by, and both along with the verse suggests that you are allowed to beat your wife if she doesn't listen to you 3 times. Hard or lighter, it's still wifebeating.
Besides, Muhammad said in Bukhari 6:301 [Muhammad] said, 'Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?' They replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in her intelligence.'"
![Well, Sahih Muslim (4:2127) Muhammad struck his favorite wife, Aisha, in the chest one evening when she left the house without his permission. Aisha narrates, "He struck me on the chest which caused me pain."
So, he did hit Aisha which caused enough pain that she reacted on it
Bukhari Book 7 Volume 72 Hadith 715
Narrated 'Ikrima:
Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon 'AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. 'Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, 'Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" When 'AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, 'Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa'a." Allah's Apostle said, to her, "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa'a unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you." Then the Prophet saw two boys with 'Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that 'AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"
And here he let's a man beat his wife since she doesn't love him. I also like how Aisha says "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing woman". You say that you are to beat your wife so that you can't see the damage, but AbdurRahman beat his wife so that her skin turned greener than her dress and Muhammad said nothing against this.
Linking me to people who answer if you are allowed to beat you wife by examining Arabic grammar is sorta pointless, since I do not know Arabic, and can't check the fact out on my own without knowing Arabic myself.
I've given you two hadiths, one who is Bukhari and one who is Muslim, both whom are the most authentic ones you can get by, and both along with the verse suggests that you are allowed to beat your wife if she doesn't listen to you 3 times. Hard or lighter, it's still wifebeating.
Besides, Muhammad said in Bukhari 6:301 [Muhammad] said, 'Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?' They replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in her intelligence.'"](http://2static4.fjcdn.com/comments/Well+sahih+muslim+4+2127+muhammad+struck+his+_2906380509640017252227168094418a.jpg)
So, he did hit Aisha which caused enough pain that she reacted on it
Bukhari Book 7 Volume 72 Hadith 715
Narrated 'Ikrima:
Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon 'AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. 'Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, 'Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" When 'AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, 'Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa'a." Allah's Apostle said, to her, "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa'a unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you." Then the Prophet saw two boys with 'Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that 'AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"
And here he let's a man beat his wife since she doesn't love him. I also like how Aisha says "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing woman". You say that you are to beat your wife so that you can't see the damage, but AbdurRahman beat his wife so that her skin turned greener than her dress and Muhammad said nothing against this.
Linking me to people who answer if you are allowed to beat you wife by examining Arabic grammar is sorta pointless, since I do not know Arabic, and can't check the fact out on my own without knowing Arabic myself.
I've given you two hadiths, one who is Bukhari and one who is Muslim, both whom are the most authentic ones you can get by, and both along with the verse suggests that you are allowed to beat your wife if she doesn't listen to you 3 times. Hard or lighter, it's still wifebeating.
Besides, Muhammad said in Bukhari 6:301 [Muhammad] said, 'Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?' They replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in her intelligence.'"
#67 to #63
-
anon (01/11/2016) [-]
Firstly, I apologize because it looks like it wasn't you that blocked me, but rather the maker of the content. Glad to see you're open to discussion Anyway, let's get into this. It's likely that neither of us will change the other's opinion, but as long as it's kept friendly, I enjoy dialogue.
I'm gonna go in order of offense then defense on the subject. Firstly, the Prophet pbuh absolutely despised lying, and if he were caught directly lying in front of others, this would've literally contradicted the whole faith that people view today. Do you really think that he directly lied (and didn't follow the Quran) given this information?:
The following Noble Verses and Sayings from the Noble Quran and Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him respectively seem to very well support the above interpretation:
"...Do not retain them (i.e., your wives) to harm them..."(The Noble Quran, 2:231)
"If a wife fears cruelty or desertion on her husband's part, there is no blame on them if they arrange an amicable settlement between themselves; and such settlement is best; even though men's souls are swayed by greed. But if ye do good and practise self-restraint, God is well-acquainted with all that ye do." (The Noble Quran, 4:128)
Narrated Mu'awiyah al-Qushayri: "I went to the Apostle of Allah (peacebeuponhim) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them." (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139) <-- classed as Sahih (meaning it's authentic, like what's in Bukhari and Muslim)
Defense:
4:2127 It said in the hadith that they went from their home to Jannatul Baqi - that is a VERY long distance. The hadith itself continues to mention that she ran_ back home and she was breathing heavily. When people breath quickly, heart rate, blood pressure, etc. increase, so even if you give an incredibly small push on someone's chest, they'll feel some pain. Feel free to test this on yourself, as it's a recorded phenomenon. This is supported by what I said about 4:34 earlier which dictated that it was supposed to be incredibly light. She didn't say she fell back or that the hit was exceptionally hard. She literally only said she felt pain, signifying that even though she did, it wasn't a lot.
AISHA EVEN SAID HERSELF:
Aaishah (Radhiallahu 'Anha) herself said: Allaah's Messenger (Sallallahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) never hit anything with his hand ever, except when fighting in the path of Allaah. Nor did he ever hit a servant or a woman." [Recorded by Musnad Ishaq bin Rawahiya no: 698, Ibn Maajah Kitab al Nikah hadeeth no: 1984 Al-Albaanee said it is Saheeh.] <-- also meaning authentic
Thus, it was a light push and nothing more.
Bukhari Book 7 Volume 72 Hadith 715:
This hadith is clearly about a ruling on a marital issue. It doesn't deal with the consequences the guy got as a result of this. I don't know if there were any, and it's likely that we'll never know unless one of us can uncover a different hadith talking about the ruling on what happened regarding whether or not he was punished.
Bukhari 6:301
www.alsiraj.net/English/misc/women/html/page20.html
I skimmed over this explanation and it looked alright.
In Islam, it's not about one being above the other, as we're all on one level under God. Our deeds are judged equally. It's a yin and yang type situation between men and women in Islam in which one helps the other be great and it comes from both ends.
I'm gonna go in order of offense then defense on the subject. Firstly, the Prophet pbuh absolutely despised lying, and if he were caught directly lying in front of others, this would've literally contradicted the whole faith that people view today. Do you really think that he directly lied (and didn't follow the Quran) given this information?:
The following Noble Verses and Sayings from the Noble Quran and Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him respectively seem to very well support the above interpretation:
"...Do not retain them (i.e., your wives) to harm them..."(The Noble Quran, 2:231)
"If a wife fears cruelty or desertion on her husband's part, there is no blame on them if they arrange an amicable settlement between themselves; and such settlement is best; even though men's souls are swayed by greed. But if ye do good and practise self-restraint, God is well-acquainted with all that ye do." (The Noble Quran, 4:128)
Narrated Mu'awiyah al-Qushayri: "I went to the Apostle of Allah (peacebeuponhim) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them." (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139) <-- classed as Sahih (meaning it's authentic, like what's in Bukhari and Muslim)
Defense:
4:2127 It said in the hadith that they went from their home to Jannatul Baqi - that is a VERY long distance. The hadith itself continues to mention that she ran_ back home and she was breathing heavily. When people breath quickly, heart rate, blood pressure, etc. increase, so even if you give an incredibly small push on someone's chest, they'll feel some pain. Feel free to test this on yourself, as it's a recorded phenomenon. This is supported by what I said about 4:34 earlier which dictated that it was supposed to be incredibly light. She didn't say she fell back or that the hit was exceptionally hard. She literally only said she felt pain, signifying that even though she did, it wasn't a lot.
AISHA EVEN SAID HERSELF:
Aaishah (Radhiallahu 'Anha) herself said: Allaah's Messenger (Sallallahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) never hit anything with his hand ever, except when fighting in the path of Allaah. Nor did he ever hit a servant or a woman." [Recorded by Musnad Ishaq bin Rawahiya no: 698, Ibn Maajah Kitab al Nikah hadeeth no: 1984 Al-Albaanee said it is Saheeh.] <-- also meaning authentic
Thus, it was a light push and nothing more.
Bukhari Book 7 Volume 72 Hadith 715:
This hadith is clearly about a ruling on a marital issue. It doesn't deal with the consequences the guy got as a result of this. I don't know if there were any, and it's likely that we'll never know unless one of us can uncover a different hadith talking about the ruling on what happened regarding whether or not he was punished.
Bukhari 6:301
www.alsiraj.net/English/misc/women/html/page20.html
I skimmed over this explanation and it looked alright.
In Islam, it's not about one being above the other, as we're all on one level under God. Our deeds are judged equally. It's a yin and yang type situation between men and women in Islam in which one helps the other be great and it comes from both ends.
#44 to #34
-
anon (01/10/2016) [-]
A. "Lasting system of discrimination" is an assertion, not an argument. Belief in such system in the western world seems to be religion in of itself. I have yet to see proof of them in the western countries, and proof that they are westerners' fault in other countries. Actually, I have yet to hear a proper definition for that term, other than vague, unsubstantiated and unverifiable ******** . Weird how such existence systems of oppression in a country seems to correlate with Islamic faith.
B. "they still treated them like humans" Surely you have a source on that. Matter to the fact is that they were still slaves, and were kidnapped, sold and forced to do stuff. Slave solders, for instance, were a common practice in arab world. You claim that in about 1300 years all 10 - 18 million slaves were just hunky dory and actually wanted to be there.
C. Slavery for purely economic reasons. I am sure that made the slaves of arabs feel so much better. White people also used slaves for purely economic reasons. Religious support came afterwards. If using slaves had not been profitable, they had not done it. If they had had a good source of white slaves, they would have used it instead.
D. "slavery only ended for political reasons". Source please. I can reference many political figures of the time, who had moral arguments against slavery. What exactly were those political reasons? Could the political reasons have been due to the fact that so many people were morally opposed to slavery? Besides, what difference does the reason make to the slaves?
B. "they still treated them like humans" Surely you have a source on that. Matter to the fact is that they were still slaves, and were kidnapped, sold and forced to do stuff. Slave solders, for instance, were a common practice in arab world. You claim that in about 1300 years all 10 - 18 million slaves were just hunky dory and actually wanted to be there.
C. Slavery for purely economic reasons. I am sure that made the slaves of arabs feel so much better. White people also used slaves for purely economic reasons. Religious support came afterwards. If using slaves had not been profitable, they had not done it. If they had had a good source of white slaves, they would have used it instead.
D. "slavery only ended for political reasons". Source please. I can reference many political figures of the time, who had moral arguments against slavery. What exactly were those political reasons? Could the political reasons have been due to the fact that so many people were morally opposed to slavery? Besides, what difference does the reason make to the slaves?
#57 to #55
-
anon (01/10/2016) [-]
You need to login to view this link
It's actually dominated by India. Most Indians are not Muslim. And why is this? Because slavery, during the times of the Middle Eastern Slave Trade, was heavily in the Indian Ocean Basin. Also, there was no lasting system of discrimination that resulted from it. There was no concept of "lynching" or "segregation", slaves had legal rights, slaves had the ability to gain freedom, it was considered an honor to manumit a slave, and slaves had to be treated with dignity.
Thus, you haven't answered my argument. Cute blocking me by the way.
It's actually dominated by India. Most Indians are not Muslim. And why is this? Because slavery, during the times of the Middle Eastern Slave Trade, was heavily in the Indian Ocean Basin. Also, there was no lasting system of discrimination that resulted from it. There was no concept of "lynching" or "segregation", slaves had legal rights, slaves had the ability to gain freedom, it was considered an honor to manumit a slave, and slaves had to be treated with dignity.
Thus, you haven't answered my argument. Cute blocking me by the way.
#7 to #2
-
timmywankenobi (01/10/2016) [-] Actualy Arabs traded approximately 10,000 times more black slaves then Europeans did .
not to mention the "Moors"- Africans 990 years ago enslaved over 100 times more Europeans mostly from western Europe , then black ever enslaved by Europeans.
If any group needs to take the blame for slavery it's the ******* Persian empire AKA Arabs. Arabs enslaved hundreds of millions of white and black people for over 1000 years !
PS. Get Educated bro, those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
not to mention the "Moors"- Africans 990 years ago enslaved over 100 times more Europeans mostly from western Europe , then black ever enslaved by Europeans.
If any group needs to take the blame for slavery it's the ******* Persian empire AKA Arabs. Arabs enslaved hundreds of millions of white and black people for over 1000 years !
PS. Get Educated bro, those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
#10 to #7
-
seniorawesomesauce ONLINE (01/10/2016) [-] "get educated"
with no sources.
If 12 million africans were sent to the new world, then by your numbers 120 BILLION people were held as slaves by "Arabs", which is more people than have ever been alive on earth in the history of the world.
Also Persians =/= all Arabs. That's like blaming Russians for the crimes committed in the Belgian Congo.
So yes, please, educate me real quick, because I actually cannot find a number on the amount of slaves the Moors had over 1,000 years ago. But if it's 100 times more than the black slaves the europeans had, then surely there must be some documentation on how over 120 MILLION europeans were enslaved, and according to the U.N. there were only 300 million peopleon earth.
with no sources.
If 12 million africans were sent to the new world, then by your numbers 120 BILLION people were held as slaves by "Arabs", which is more people than have ever been alive on earth in the history of the world.
Also Persians =/= all Arabs. That's like blaming Russians for the crimes committed in the Belgian Congo.
So yes, please, educate me real quick, because I actually cannot find a number on the amount of slaves the Moors had over 1,000 years ago. But if it's 100 times more than the black slaves the europeans had, then surely there must be some documentation on how over 120 MILLION europeans were enslaved, and according to the U.N. there were only 300 million peopleon earth.
#11 to #10
-
seniorawesomesauce ONLINE (01/10/2016) [-] actually that second number should be 1.2 billion european slaves.
#15 to #10
-
timmywankenobi (01/10/2016) [-] Obviously there weren't 12 million slaves sent to the US .
Persian Empire covered almost every middle eastern country and turkey, even Spain was taken, stretching out to try to take over Romania but vlaid the impaler stopped them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsa8CZG4As8
Persian Empire covered almost every middle eastern country and turkey, even Spain was taken, stretching out to try to take over Romania but vlaid the impaler stopped them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsa8CZG4As8
#22 to #15
-
seniorawesomesauce ONLINE (01/10/2016) [-] wtf are you talking about. According to the sources in the spoilers, 12 million (or possibly more) slaves were transferred from Africa to the New World, which includes both North and South America, NOT just the US.
Also the Persian Empire at its greatest extent owned modern day Iran, Iraq, and parts of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Turkey, Bulgaria and Egypt. It NEVER reached anywhere near spain. The Umayyad Caliphate on the other hand, did in fact reach across North Africa and into Spain, however it never fully took Turkey because a tiny country called the Byzantine Empire stopped it, meaning it never tried to take Romania. These two empires were separated by 900 years, and were entirely distinct from one another. Islam didn't even exist during the time of the Persian Empire. Also Vlad the Impaler was not born until 1431, long after any any of these empires.
And the only number that comes from your video on the topic of the amount of slaves that the Muslims took from north africa is 1.25 million, which is 1/10 the amount europeans took from all of Africa.
www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/dialogue/the-slave-route/transatlantic-slave-trade/
ldhi.library.cofc.edu/exhibits/show/africanpassageslowcountryadapt/introductionatlanticworld/trans_atlantic_slave_trade
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade
Also the Persian Empire at its greatest extent owned modern day Iran, Iraq, and parts of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Turkey, Bulgaria and Egypt. It NEVER reached anywhere near spain. The Umayyad Caliphate on the other hand, did in fact reach across North Africa and into Spain, however it never fully took Turkey because a tiny country called the Byzantine Empire stopped it, meaning it never tried to take Romania. These two empires were separated by 900 years, and were entirely distinct from one another. Islam didn't even exist during the time of the Persian Empire. Also Vlad the Impaler was not born until 1431, long after any any of these empires.
And the only number that comes from your video on the topic of the amount of slaves that the Muslims took from north africa is 1.25 million, which is 1/10 the amount europeans took from all of Africa.
www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/dialogue/the-slave-route/transatlantic-slave-trade/
ldhi.library.cofc.edu/exhibits/show/africanpassageslowcountryadapt/introductionatlanticworld/trans_atlantic_slave_trade
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade
#56 to #22
-
timmywankenobi (01/10/2016) [-] ohh you're including south America and Jamaica, yeah those south Americans had a butt load of slaves but you specifically blamed Caucasians not Hispanics,Jamaicans mestizo or native Americans . I though you were only talking about the US. I'm sorry I don't keep a detailed account of every ******* Caliphate/empire in that region , same people, nearly identical culture different ******* name. and your right I meant to include the Berbers and Moors in the 10th and 11th century as well as the ottomans.
remember there were a lot less European people in the 10th century so 1.25 million had a massive impact. Also Muslims/Arab's enslaved for more black people then white ones they created the word ****** and told Europeans blacks were sub human
Arabs are the source of that racism. Not to ******* mention many Arab countries still endorse and partake in slavery to this ******* day !!!
remember there were a lot less European people in the 10th century so 1.25 million had a massive impact. Also Muslims/Arab's enslaved for more black people then white ones they created the word ****** and told Europeans blacks were sub human
Arabs are the source of that racism. Not to ******* mention many Arab countries still endorse and partake in slavery to this ******* day !!!
#12 to #2
-
anon (01/10/2016) [-] **anonymous used "*roll picture*"**
**anonymous rolled image**People also forget that (primarily) North African Muslims actively engaged in the Arab slave trades which was mainly Europeans slaves sent out to various parts of Africa and the Middle East. With pretty comparable numbers to that of the Atlantic slave trade.
But we don't talk about that I guess. People would rather believe that only white people traded slaves, and those slaves were only black people. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
**anonymous rolled image**People also forget that (primarily) North African Muslims actively engaged in the Arab slave trades which was mainly Europeans slaves sent out to various parts of Africa and the Middle East. With pretty comparable numbers to that of the Atlantic slave trade.
But we don't talk about that I guess. People would rather believe that only white people traded slaves, and those slaves were only black people. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
#23 to #12
-
seniorawesomesauce ONLINE (01/10/2016) [-] No they didn't. Arabs that ravaged the North African coast captured a total of 1.25 million slaves. Compare that to the Europeans 12 million slaves that they took from the rest of the continent.
#30 to #2
-
mytwocents (01/10/2016) [-] at least the arabs were clever enough to smash the nuts of their slaves, so they did not create offspring in arabia. one of the few "good" things the arabs did.
#14 to #6
-
rdangerdash ONLINE (01/10/2016) [-] Do people not like the show? I would rate it among my favourite shows. That being said I haven't read the book.
#48 to #20
-
asftrooper (01/10/2016) [-]
Didn't they also raped a bunch of woman while the media and police covered the whole thing up?
#13
-
vorarephilia 
(01/10/2016) [-] -spraypainted on the side of a Palestinian house by Israelis.
So we like jews now right? or are we doing the classic "my enemy is the enemy of my other enemy."
(01/10/2016) [-] 
So we like jews now right? or are we doing the classic "my enemy is the enemy of my other enemy."
#17 to #16
-
vorarephilia (01/10/2016) [-] does this include italians and basically everyone who works outdoors for a living?
(01/10/2016) [-] 
#26 to #17
-
commontroll (01/10/2016) [-] You say that like we wouldn't include those vile outsiders.
#31
-
laizk (01/10/2016) [-]
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
#36
-
yourinvisiblegf (01/10/2016) [-] 
This might have the interest of the frogs and other french speakers
#29
-
mytwocents (01/10/2016) [-] It is a illusion by a minority of leftist multiculturalists to label these people "german".
The tide is already turning. Only 10% of them are metally able to be integrated into german society and may start an employment. And that's the offical statistic. Do you think any real german would think "great, let's pay for foreign rapefugees the next 60 years till they die." ? Germany will remain the nation of ethnic white germans. These invadors either leave or will get deported. You know the 3rd option.
The tide is already turning. Only 10% of them are metally able to be integrated into german society and may start an employment. And that's the offical statistic. Do you think any real german would think "great, let's pay for foreign rapefugees the next 60 years till they die." ? Germany will remain the nation of ethnic white germans. These invadors either leave or will get deported. You know the 3rd option.
