Thread: Fiorina sings the praises of Islam, Ottoman Empire 'greatest civilization'

Trump is right, I don't want to look at that face for 4 to 8 years listening to tall tales coming out of THAT mouth.

Originally Posted by csarbww

Nkosi: Oh you must mean the Moors who were waging war and conquering Christian lands across North Africa. You know those areas the Romans once occupied; you know THE ROMANS WITH THEIR GIANT COMMUNITY BATHS! Learn your history pal.

Funny how you mentioned religion and communal baths together.

"Before the Middle Ages, public baths were very common, as was the general public regularly taking time to bathe in one way or another. Even during the 4^th and 5^th centuries, Christian authorities allowed people to bathe for cleanliness and health, but condemned attendance to public bath houses for pleasure and condemned women going to bath houses that had mixed facilities."
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index....dieval-europe/

The clergy was really trying to curb homosexuality and the modesty of women and children. But still, most people were funky except on Sundays.
The Moors improved on the water delivery systems of the Romans and allowed individuals to bathe in a less homosexual prominent environment.

As far as learning my history, I have studied the Battle of Isandlwana, Gullah Wars, Toussaint L'Ouverture, Marcus Garvey...

Originally Posted by csarbww

Thanks for your great post Newmexican.

There has been so much rewriting of history to assist the cultural Marxist’s inculcating guilt in the European mind. The Muslims were never nice or tolerant people. Most of their “culture” was simply confiscated booty from the Christians who were there before them.

Here is just a tiny bit more: And then there is slavery. The nearly complete abolition of legal slavery in Africa did not happen until the early 20th century because of Colonization by those "evil" white Europeans.

Historian Robert Davis in his book "Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters - White Slavery In the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast and Italy",estimates that North African Muslim pirates abducted and enslaved more than 1million Europeans between 1530 and 1780. These white Christians were seized in a series of raids which depopulated coastal towns from Sicily to Cornwall. Thousands of white Christians in coastal areas were seized every year to workas galley slaves, laborers and concubines for Muslim slave masters in what is today Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria and Libya. Villages and towns on the coast of Italy, Spain, Portugal and France were the hardest hit, but the Muslim slave raiders also seized people as far afield as Britain, Ireland and Iceland. They even captured 130 American seamen from ships they boarded in the Atlantic between 1785 and 1793.

This is just a tiny part of the “glorious” non Christian, non white history of the world.

Slavery, as an institution is multifaceted, and at times, a more confusing subject due to the lecturer's motives.
Slavery in Africa is in no way like its European counterpart. All systems of slavery, except European slavery, kept the slave's humanity from being debatable.
In Africa, your reputation depended on how well you treated your slaves. Slaves were legally allowed to get married. A slave
could even own a slave of his own. If an African mistreats a slave he could get into heavy trouble. Violating a slave (rape), would
get you killed.

In China, able bodied men would volunteer to be a slave to the emperor. They would volunteer to be castrated in order to work in the
emperor's house. The slave was to do the heavy lifting of maintaining the palace and serve as a "deputy" to help keep order.
Being castrated, you could pleasure the emperor's wife but never produce...

Europeans used chattel slavery. Sounds like cattle slavery. Recognizing a slave as a person became a problem in Euro-Slavery. Heard of the "Missouri Compromise".
I always thought that raping a "thing" was reprobate in nature. Hide the sheep, chickens and anything else with a hole...

Then people bring the Bible into the conversation. Jesus couldn't have been referring to "Euro-Slavery"
when he failed to condemn the practice of slavery.

...and there are others: Islamic slave systems, Aztecs...

I am not going to get into an endless back and forth about how crappy the West is supposed to be. Somebody will always dig up another excuse to prolong the debate.

So for the last time, overwhelmingly the Western societies got rid of slavery long before the Muslim countries. Although throughout Africa the abolition of slavery began in the early 20^th century many states were very slow putting an end to it. For example it was not until 1962 that Saudi Arabia abolished slavery and in the United Arab Emiratesit it did not end until 1964. The idea that Asian and African slavery was a more benign system of human bondage is ridiculous on its face. Although in principle the institution itself is evil, for the most part, in the United States there many factors that tended to moderate the treatment of black slaves. The belief that slave-breeding, sexual exploitation and promiscuity of slaves was common is a gross exaggeration. The family was the basic unit of social organization under slavery. It was to the economic interest of the slave owner to encourage the stability of slave families as much as feasible.

On the coasts, Africans themselves were the suppliers of African slaves to European slave traders. Africans themselves were complicit in the slave trade.

The importation of new slaves into the United States was abolished in 1808.

The United States fought a bloody war in part motivated by the issue of freeing Black slaves, White people killing other White people with Blacks becoming the beneficiaries of the Yankee victory. No other nation has done that—not one.

Now that is all I am going to say on that subject. I have higher priority issues to which I want to respond.

Sometimes I think ignorance is akin to a childlike view of the world.

Then on the other hand, ignorance is a potent addictive drug designed to befuddle the mind
and confound logic even when proof is before their very eyes.

It is a sad condition, for all men, when they have freely given themselves over to the ignorance
and infuse their arguments with nonsense in order to justify their continuing
walk, hand in hand with ignorance.

Good day.

"He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past." George Orwell.

Sorry you don't get to write your own version of history and then accuse those who know the empirical facts as being ignorant.

Your comprehension is taking a beating.

Accusations are what I have nullified in this post.

Continue on in your walk, friend.

Hand in hand...

Man, you really have a hard time admitting you are wrong don't you? Everything I have posted is historically factual and documented. I am sorry that an honest history of European culture is not as rotten as you want it to be. Sorry, that the Muslim world is a disaster. Sometimes some civilizations are simply better than others. Sorry that is the facts of life do not tell us what we want to hear.

Slavery was hotly dealt with here over 160 years ago, the roots of slavery however are deep in Africa and the Middle East.

Slavery, is still a reality in Africa and the Middle East.

The only "slaves" that I see in this country are the economic citizen slaves that get up and go to work every day to pay for everyone else's life choices. They are supporting masses of illegal foreign nationals and others that have entrenched themselves into the welfare system and produce children for income .

It is interesting that the first slaves in this country were white and I have read that only 1/3 of the African Americans in this country are actually descendants of African slaves, the rest are immigrants post Civil War.

The Irish Slave Trade – The Forgotten “White” Slaves

The Slaves That Time Forgot

By John Martin
Global Research, March 17, 2015
Oped News and Global Research 14 April 2008

Originally published in 2008:
They came as slaves; vast human cargo transported on tall British ships bound for the Americas. They were shipped by the hundreds of thousands and included men, women, and even the youngest of children.
Whenever they rebelled or even disobeyed an order, they were punished in the harshest ways. Slave owners would hang their human property by their hands and set their hands or feet on fire as one form of punishment. They were burned alive and had their heads placed on pikes in the marketplace as a warning to other captives.
We don’t really need to go through all of the gory details, do we? We know all too well the atrocities of the African slave trade.
But, are we talking about African slavery? King James II and Charles I also led a continued effort to enslave the Irish. Britain’s famed Oliver Cromwell furthered this practice of dehumanizing one’s next door neighbor.
The Irish slave trade began when James II sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. His Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat. At that time, 70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves.
Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white.
From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and another 300,000 were sold as slaves. Ireland’s population fell from about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. Families were ripped apart as the British did not allow Irish dads to take their wives and children with them across the Atlantic. This led to a helpless population of homeless women and children. Britain’s solution was to auction them off as well.
During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656, Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.
Many people today will avoid calling the Irish slaves what they truly were: Slaves. They’ll come up with terms like “Indentured Servants” to describe what occurred to the Irish. However, in most cases from the 17th and 18th centuries, Irish slaves were nothing more than human cattle.
As an example, the African slave trade was just beginning during this same period. It is well recorded that African slaves, not tainted with the stain of the hated Catholic theology and more expensive to purchase, were often treated far better than their Irish counterparts.
African slaves were very expensive during the late 1600s (50 Sterling). Irish slaves came cheap (no more than 5 Sterling). If a planter whipped or branded or beat an Irish slave to death, it was never a crime. A death was a monetary setback, but far cheaper than killing a more expensive African. The English masters quickly began breeding the Irish women for both their own personal pleasure and for greater profit. Children of slaves were themselves slaves, which increased the size of the master’s free workforce. Even if an Irish woman somehow obtained her freedom, her kids would remain slaves of her master. Thus, Irish moms, even with this new found emancipation, would seldom abandon their kids and would remain in servitude.
In time, the English thought of a better way to use these women (in many cases, girls as young as 12) to increase their market share: The settlers began to breed Irish women and girls with African men to produce slaves with a distinct complexion. These new “mulatto” slaves brought a higher price than Irish livestock and, likewise, enabled the settlers to save money rather than purchase new African slaves. This practice of interbreeding Irish females with African men went on for several decades and was so widespread that, in 1681, legislation was passed “forbidding the practice of mating Irish slave women to African slave men for the purpose of producing slaves for sale.” In short, it was stopped only because it interfered with the profits of a large slave transport company.
England continued to ship tens of thousands of Irish slaves for more than a century. Records state that, after the 1798 Irish Rebellion, thousands of Irish slaves were sold to both America and Australia. There were horrible abuses of both African and Irish captives. One British ship even dumped 1,302 slaves into the Atlantic Ocean so that the crew would have plenty of food to eat.
There is little question that the Irish experienced the horrors of slavery as much (if not more in the 17th Century) as the Africans did. There is, also, very little question that those brown, tanned faces you witness in your travels to the West Indies are very likely a combination of African and Irish ancestry. In 1839, Britain finally decided on it’s own to end it’s participation in Satan’s highway to hell and stopped transporting slaves. While their decision did not stop pirates from doing what they desired, the new law slowly concluded THIS chapter of nightmarish Irish misery.
But, if anyone, black or white, believes that slavery was only an African experience, then they’ve got it completely wrong.
Irish slavery is a subject worth remembering, not erasing from our memories.
But, where are our public (and PRIVATE) schools???? Where are the history books? Why is it so seldom discussed?
Do the memories of hundreds of thousands of Irish victims merit more than a mention from an unknown writer?
Or is their story to be one that their English pirates intended: To (unlike the African book) have the Irish story utterly and completely disappear as if it never happened.
None of the Irish victims ever made it back to their homeland to describe their ordeal. These are the lost slaves; the ones that time and biased history books conveniently forgot.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-iri...e-slaves/31076


Read up in the first and second Barbary wars with the Ottoman Empire. For 25 years they Barbary Pirates, (Muslim) raided our ships and took our people as slaves.

About them
British Slaves on the Barbary Coast

By Robert Davis
Last updated 2011-02-17rmen and coastal dwellers of 17th-century Britain lived in terror of being kidnapped by pirates and sold into slavery in North Africa. Hundreds of thousands across Europe met w

Europe under attack

'When we had arrived [in Cork], I made a request to Lord Inchaquoin to give me a passport for England. I took boat to Youghal and then embarked on the vessel John Filmer, which set sail with 120 passengers. `But before we had lost sight of land, we were captured by Algerine pirates, who put all the men in irons.'

...the corsairs plundered British shipping pretty much at will...

So wrote the Reverend Devereux Spratt - carried off in April 1641 for several years' bondage in Algiers, while attempting a simple voyage across the Irish Sea from County Cork to England. Spratt's experience has been largely forgotten now, though it was far from unique in his day.

In the first half of the 1600s, Barbary corsairs - pirates from the Barbary Coast of North Africa, authorised by their governments to attack the shipping of Christian countries - ranged all around Britain's shores. In their lanteen-rigged xebecs (a type of ship) and oared galleys, they grabbed ships and sailors, and sold the sailors into slavery. Admiralty records show that during this time the corsairs plundered British shipping pretty much at will, taking no fewer than 466 vessels between 1609 and 1616, and 27 more vessels from near Plymouth in 1625. As 18th-century historian Joseph Morgan put it, 'this I take to be the Time when those Corsairs were in theirZenith'.

Unfortunately, it was hardly the end of them, even then. Morgan also noted that he had a '...List, printed in London in 1682' of 160 British ships captured by Algerians between 1677 and 1680. Considering what the number of sailors who were taken with each ship was likely to have been, these examples translate into a probable 7,000 to 9,000 able-bodied British men and women taken into slavery in those years.

Not content with attacking ships and sailors, the corsairs also sometimes raided coastal settlements, generally running their craft onto unguarded beaches, and creeping up on villages in the dark to snatch their victims and retreat before the alarm could be sounded. Almost all the inhabitants of the village of Baltimore, in Ireland, were taken in this way in 1631, and other attacks were launched against coastal villages in Devon and Cornwall. Samuel Pepys gives a vivid account of an encounter with two men who'd been taken into slavery, in his diary of 8 February 1661.

g these years, Britons were enslaved all too often.

'...to the Fleece tavern to drink and there we spent till 4 a-clock telling stories of Algier and the manner of the life of Slaves there; and truly, Captain Mootham and Mr Dawes (who have been both slaves there) did make me full acquainted with their condition there. As, how they eat nothing but bread and water.... How they are beat upon the soles of the feet and bellies at the Liberty of their Padron. How they are all night called into their master's Bagnard, and there they lie.'

The very casualness of the account makes it clear just how commonplace unfortunates like Moontham and Dawes were in 17th-century Britain. Britons in later years have boasted that they 'never will be slaves,' but during these years they were enslaved all too often.

Top

Estimating slave numbers

North African pirate ship ©

According to observers of the late 1500s and early 1600s, there were around 35,000 European Christian slaves held throughout this time on the Barbary Coast - many in Tripoli, Tunis, and various Moroccan towns, but most of all in Algiers. The greatest number were sailors, taken with their ships, but a good many were fishermen and coastal villagers. Out of all these, the British captives were mostly sailors, and although they were numerous there were relatively fewer of them than of people from lands close to Africa, especially Spain and Italy. The unfortunate southerners were sometimes taken by the thousands, by slavers who raided the coasts of Valencia, Andalusia, Calabria and Sicily so often that eventually it was said that 'there was no one left to capture any longer'.

White slaves in Barbary were generally from impoverished families...

There are no records of how many men, women and children were enslaved, but it is possible to calculate roughly the number of fresh captives that would have been needed to keep populations steady and replace those slaves who died, escaped, were ransomed, or converted to Islam. On this basis it is thought that around 8,500 new slaves were needed annually to replenish numbers - about 850,000 captives over the century from 1580 to 1680.

By extension, for the 250 years between 1530 and 1780, the figure could easily have been as high as 1,250,000 - this is only just over a tenth of the Africans taken as slaves to the Americas from 1500 to 1800, but a considerable figure nevertheless. White slaves in Barbary were generally from impoverished families, and had almost as little hope of buying back their freedom as the Africans taken to the Americas: most would end their days as slaves in North Africa, dying of starvation, disease, or maltreatment.

Top

The slave's lot

Slaves in chains ©

Slaves in Barbary fell into two broad categories. The 'public slaves' belonged to the ruling pasha, who by right of rulership could claim an eighth of all Christians captured by the corsairs, and buy all the others he wanted at reduced prices. These slaves were housed in large prisons known as baños (baths), often in wretchedly overcrowded conditions. They were mostly used to row the corsair galleys in the pursuit of loot (and more slaves) - work so strenuous that thousands died or went mad while chained to the oar.

...they received one change of clothing every year.

During the winter these galeotti worked on state projects - quarrying stone, building walls or harbour facilities, felling timber and constructing new galleys. Each day they would be given perhaps two or three loaves of black bread - 'that the dogs themselves wouldn't eat' - and limited water; they received one change of clothing every year. Those who collapsed on the job from exhaustion or malnutrition were typically beaten until they got up and went back to work. The pasha also bought most female captives, some of whom were taken into his harem, where they lived out their days in captivity. The majority, however, were purchased for their ransom value; while awaiting their release, they worked in the palace as harem attendants.

Some were well cared for, becoming virtual companions of their owners...

Many other slaves belonged to 'private parties.' Their treatment and work varied as much as their masters did. Some were well cared for, becoming virtual companions of their owners. Others were worked as hard as any 'public' slave, in agricultural labour, or construction work, or selling water or other goods around town on his (or her) owner's behalf. They were expected to pay a proportion of their earnings to their owner - those who failed to raise the required amount typically being beaten to encourage them to work harder.

As they aged or their owner's fortunes changed, slaves were resold, often repeatedly. The most unlucky ended up stuck and forgotten out in the desert, in some sleepy town such as Suez, or in the Turkish sultan's galleys, where some slaves rowed for decades without ever setting foot on shore.op

The European response

A priest negotiates ransom for the release of slaves ©

Europeans sometimes attempted to buy their people out of slavery, but no real system emerged before around 1640. Then the attempts became more systematic and were sometimes state subsidised, as in Spain and France. Almost all the actual work, however - from collecting the funds, to voyaging to Barbary, to negotiating with the slave owners there - was carried out by clergy, mostly members of the Trinitarian or Mercedarian orders.

By the 1700s, the ransoming orders had significantly reduced slave populations in Barbary...

Parish churches too, all over Spain and Italy, kept locked collection boxes marked 'for the poor slaves', with clerics constantly reminded their wealthier parishioners to include ransoming societies in their wills; slave-redeeming confraternities also sprouted in hundreds of cities and villages. Ransoming slaves was promoted as being one of the best of the charitable works a Catholic could perform, since slaves were ideal victims: 'Their [only] fault, their crime, is recognising Jesus Christ as the most divine Saviour... and of professing Him as the True Faith.' By the 1700s, the ransoming orders had significantly reduced slave populations in Barbary, eventually even inflating slave prices, as more cash chased fewer captives.

Thousands of Dutch, Germans and British "languished for years in the chains of Barbary"...

Compared to Catholic Europe, Protestant states could be lax and disorganised in freeing their subjects. Thousands of Dutch, Germans and British 'languished for years in the chains of Barbary,' without the aid of organised clergy or state funds for their release. England set aside its 'Algerian Duty' from customs income to finance redemptions, but much of this was diverted to other uses. Large-scale ransomings - like the one headed by Edmund Casson that freed 244 men, women, and children in 1646 - were rare, with the result that Protestant Britons were often more demoralised and likely to die in captivity than European Catholics. As one ex-slave noted:

'All of the nations made some shift to live, save only the English, who it seems are not so shiftful as others, and... have no great kindness one for another. The winter I was in [captivity], I observ'd there died above twenty of them out of pure want.'

Top

The legacy of enslavement

Many slaves converted to Islam, though, as Morgan put it, this only meant they were 'freed from the Oar, tho' not from [their] Patron's Service.' Christian women who had been taken into the pasha's harem often 'turned Turk' to stay with their children, who were raised as Muslims.

In the 1600s, no one's racial background or religion automatically destined him or her for enslavement.

Men sought easier labours, usually as overseers for other slaves, and some gained real power and occasionally their freedom. Between 1580 and 1680, there were typically around 15,000 of these 'renegades' in Barbary, including around half of the corsair captains, or re'is, and even some of the pashas. Most had probably never been slaves, however, but had come to North Africa looking for opportunity, and had cast off their Christianity along with their earlier lives.

Slaves in Barbary could be black, brown or white, Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, Jewish or Muslim. Contemporaries were too aware of the sort of people enslaved in North Africa to believe, as many do today, that slavery, whether in Barbary or the Americas, was a matter of race. In the 1600s, no one's racial background or religion automatically destined him or her for enslavement. Preachers in churches from Sicily to Boston spoke of the similar fates of black slaves on American plantations and white slaves in corsair galleys; early abolitionists used Barbary slavery as a way to attack the universal degradation of slavery in all its forms.

This may require that we rethink our belief that race was fundamental to pre-modern ideas about slavery.

This may require that we rethink our belief that race was fundamental to pre-modern ideas about slavery.

It also requires a new awareness of the impact of slave raids on Spain and Italy - and Britain - about which we currently know rather less than we do about slaving activities at the same time in Africa. The widespread depopulation of coastal areas from Malaga to Venice, the impoverishment caused by the kidnapping of many breadwinners, the millions paid by the already poor inhabitants of villages and towns to get their own people back - all this is only just beginning to be understood by modern-day historians.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british...laves_01.shtml

Great post Newmexican:

It is long past time that we moved beyond the racial guilt over Black slavery and had a factual understanding of the evil institution with an objective historical perspective.