Well, the slaves were bought first, and later when the British knew about the trade, they captured them themselves. They were still trading slaves with rich landowners etc...
(Original post by SMed)
Thanks for the polite correction... this changes everything I've ever thought about slavery.
I think you should take particular attention to your own words
(Original post by Claymatser)
yep. next time don't judge your assumptions and try to pass them off as facts.
Last edited by de_monies; 17-04-2012 at 15:30.
I didn't advocate anything, rather I spoke of history and circumstancial events that no one in the future can predict.
No one said anything about how slavery should be re-instituted in "modern society".
(Original post by silverbolt)
A well fed slave is still a slave. In a modern society you shouldnt have to gain an oppurtunity for freedom, it should automatically be yours. Slavery is barbaric - the mark of primitives who control through fear and power. But seeing as how your culture treats its women im not suprised to see you advocate this
The beautiful irony of it is, right now you talk about "modernism" and how you condemn slavery, yet had you lived just a few centuries earlier, you would have the complete opposite view. You also don't have any understanding or experience of war, why slavery in the past even existed etc. Actually, you don't have any concept of what slavery actually even is, or the fact that it's even more rampant today than it was in history.
A product of your environment and a slave to society. A seemingly worthless opinion based on Islamaphobic contentions.
That fact you could even compare the Atlantic slave trade to the Islamic one shows how clueless you are on the subject.
(Original post by SMed)
You think slavery should be required during war? Then why is slavery banned in Islamic countries today? And what about children of slaves? They weren't war criminals, why should they be bought and sold like commodities?
No matter how nice you think it was for them, the Islamic Slave trade was not all that different to the Atlantic Slave trade.
Interestingly, the Americans wanted more men for labour, and the Arabs wanted more women as concubines. Muslims went to Africa and captured people from their home lands, just like Westerners. Both were horrific, even if it's claimed one was 'nicer' to their slaves.
They still owned and traded people like commodities.
No one denies that during times in history, Muslims did things which were uncalled for. But when we have a general outlook of it, there was a huge difference between atlantic and islamic. It's like someone saying; "Brits are cannabals, cos there was 1 case in 100 years of cannabalism".
And you completly took my post out of context and misrepresented what I said. I don't think it's worth wasting my time on if you're going to be hard-headed about it.
Last edited by Perseveranze; 17-04-2012 at 16:13.
If you can't put forward your argument in a coherent and level-headed manner then perhaps you shouldn't say anything at all, calling me an idiot is just childish. Control your emotions man!
(Original post by xXxiKillxXx)
You are such an idiot. I don't care if I get a warning for this. You haven't even watched the video in the original post..
The evidence speaks for itself:
"You should listen to and obey, your ruler even if he was an Ethiopian (black) slave whose head looks like a raisin."
Sahih Bukhari 9256
The most hateful among the creation of Allah us one black man among them (Khwarij). One of his hand is like the teat of a goat or the nipple of the breast.
Sahih Muslim 5:2334
Noah prayed that the prophets and apostles would be descended from Shem and kings would be from Japheth. He prayed that the African’s color would change so that their descendants would be slaves to the Arabs and Turks.
Al-Tabari, Vol. 2, p. 11, p. 11
Ham [Africans] begat all those who are black and curly-haired, while Japheth [Turks] begat all those who are full-faced with small eyes, and Shem [Arabs] begat everyone who is handsome of face with beautiful hair. Noah prayed that the hair of Ham’s descendants would not grow beyond their ears, and that whenever his descendants met Shem’s, the latter would enslave them.
Al-Tabari, Vol. 2, p. 21, p. 21
A man of B. al-'Ajilan told me that he was told that Gabriel came to the apostle and said, 'There comes to sit with you a black man with long flowing hair, ruddy cheeks, and inflamed eyes like two copper pots. His heart is more gross than a donkey's; he carries your words to the hypocrites, so beware of him.' This, so they say, was the description of Nabtal.
"I have heard the Apostle say: 'Whoever wants to see Satan should look at Nabtal.' He was a sturdy black man with long flowing hair
We collected them there, black slaves, men of no descent.
The black troops and slaves of the Meccans cried out and the Muslims replied, ‘Allah destroy your sight, you impious rascals.’
"Abu Darda reported that the Holy Prophet said: Allah created Adam when he created him (sic). Then He stroke (sic) his right shoulder and took out a white race as if they were seeds, and He stroke (sic) his left shoulder and took out a black race as if they were coals. Then He said to those who were in his right side: Towards paradise and I don't care. He said to those who were on his left shoulder: Towards Hell and I don't care. - Ahmad"
Mishkat, Vol. 3, p. 117
Ahmad ibn Abi Sulayman, the companion of Sahnun said, “Anyone who says that the Prophet was black should be killed.
Ibn Musa al-Yahsubi, Qadi ‘Iyad, p.375
Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "I saw (in a dream) a black woman with unkempt hair going out of Medina and settling at Mahai'a, i.e., Al-Juhfa. I interpreted that as a symbol of epidemic of Medina being transferred to that place (Al-Juhfa)."
Sahih Bukhari 9161
And on the day of resurrection you shall see those who lied against Allah; their faces shall be blackened. Is there not in hell an abode for the proud?
Muhammad had hundreds of Black Slaves.
I find it crazy when people compare Muhammad to Jesus, two completely different people.
However I'd like to see anyones response to this, I may be wrong after all.
Last edited by VivaAngola!; 17-04-2012 at 23:27.
Ibn Ishaq is what we call a "weak" source. His hadiths are unreliable and he has been known to narrate from a string of unknowns.
No Muhammad (saw) had only ONE slave aside from concubines, his name was Zaid bin Haritha and he wasn't black. He was later freed by the Prophet (saw) and nicknamed "the Prophet's beloved", as he was always very close to the Prophet (saw), almost like a son.
(Original post by VivaAngola!)
Muhammad had hundreds of Black Slaves.
Actually, the Prophet (saw) had no servants at all, and would not allow his family to employ servants.
Narrated 'Ali: Fatima complained about the blisters on her hand because of using a mill-stone. She went to ask the Prophet for servant, but she did not find him (at home) and had to inform 'Aisha of her need. When he came, 'Aisha informed him about it. Ali added: The Prophet came to us when we had gone to our beds. When I was going to get up, he said, "'Stay in your places," and sat between us, till I felt the coolness of the feet on my chest. The Prophet then said, "Shall I not tell you of a thing which is better for you than a servant? When you (both) go to your beds, say 'Allahu Akbar' thirty-four times, and 'Subhan Allah' thirty-three times, 'Alhamdu 'illah' thirty-three times, for that is better for you than a servant." Ibn Sirin said, "Subhan Allah' (is to be said for) thirty-four times." (Sahih Bukhari, book 75, Hadith #330)
Last edited by naiadania; 17-04-2012 at 23:45.