Blacks treated like trash in Islamic Yemen

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 Anas bin Malik: While we were sitting with the Prophet in the mosque, a man came riding on a camel. He made his camel kneel down in the mosque, tied its foreleg and then said: “Who amongst you is Muhammad?” At that time the Prophet was sitting amongst us (his companions) leaning on his arm. We replied, “This white man reclining on his arm.”The an then addressed him, “O Son of ‘Abdul Muttalib.”…

9 thoughts on “Blacks treated like trash in Islamic Yemen

  1. White was referring to his complexion not his racist.The prophets(PBUH) mother was Ethiopian…how is he white? Since when did Arab become a race when anyone that spoke ARABIC in and around the region was considered ARAB?
    This from a Turkish Muslim who describes himself as white…
    I am an Arab of Turkish descent so I suppose I am a “white” Arab. I am also a classic Islamic scholar. The Prophet Mohammed was BLACK. All the early Islamic literature described him and his family as Black. Remember, at that time there was no prejudice against being Black, and people who are called “white” today were actually looked down upon and were the slaves. Read the following (some of the alphabet characters could not be reproduced)

    In his work, Islam’s Black Legacy: Some Leading Figures (1993), Mohammed Abu-Bakr
    includes among 62 leading Black figures of Islam the prophet Muhammad himself.1 Abu-Bakr rightly
    “According to Muslim tradition, Muhammad descended in a straight line from Ishmael’s second son Kedar
    (Arabic: Qaidar), whose name in Hebrew signifies ‘black’…From the sons of Kedar inhabiting the northern
    Arabian desert, sprang the noblest tribe in Arabia, the Koreish (Quraysh), the tribe from which Muhammad

    As we have also discussed above, the Arabian Qedar were a black tribe akin to the equally black
    Nabataeans, and these two were in someway related to the Quraysh, the black tribe par excellence of Mecca.
    As Robert F. Spencer remarks: “It is said that the Quraysh explained their short stature and dark skin by
    the fact that they always carefully adhered to endogamy.”3 Al-Jahiz (d. 869), the important Afro-Iraqi
    scholar of ninth century Baghdad, noted in his Fakhr al-sådan ala al-bidan, “The Boast of the Blacks over
    the Whites”:

    The ten lordly sons of Abd al-Muããalib were deep black (dalham) in color and big/tall (Dukhm). When
    Amir b. al-Tufayl saw them circumambulating (the Ka’ba) like dark camels, he said, “With such men as these
    is the custody of the Ka’ba preserved.” Abd Allah b. Abbas was very black and tall. Those of Abå Talib’s
    family, who are the most noble of men, are more or less black (såd).”4

    This report is important for our discussion, not only because Abd al-Muããalib and his ten black
    sons were pure Arabs, but also because they are also the family of the Prophet, Abd al-Muããalib
    being his paternal grandfather.5 The Syrian scholar and historian al-Dhahabī (d. 1348) too reported
    that Abd Allāh b. Abbās, Muhammad’s first cousin, and his son, Alī b. Abd Allāh, were “very
    dark-skinned.”6 Alī b. Abu Talib, first cousin of the Prophet and future fourth caliph, is described by
    al-Suyuti and others as “husky, bald…pot-bellied, large-bearded…and jet-black (shadīd al-udma).”7
    Alī’s son, Abå Jafar Muhammad, according to Ibn Sad (d. 845), described Alī thusly: “He was a
    black-skinned man with big, heavy eyes, pot-bellied, bald, and kind of short.”8

    This convergence of blackness, nobility and Qurayshī ethnicity is further demonstrated in these lines
    attributed to the seventh century CE Qurayshī poet, al-Fadil b. al-Abbas, called al-Akhdar al-LahabÊ
    “The Flaming Black”. al-Fadil is the Prophet Muhammad’s first cousin and he said: “I am the blackskinned
    one (al-Akhdar). I am well-known. My complexion is black. I am from the noble house of the
    Arabs.”9 Ibn Maníår (d. 1311) notes the opinion that al-Akh∙ar here means aswad al-jilda, ‘Blackskinned’,
    and signifies that al-Fadil is from khaliß al-arab, the pure Arabs, “because the color of most
    of the Arabs is dark (al-udma).”10 Similarly Ibn BarrÊ (d. 1193) said also: “He (al-Fadil) means by this
    that his genealogy is pure and that he is a pure Arab (arabÊ mahd) because Arabs describe their color as
    black (al-aswad).”11 Thus, al-Fadil’s blackness (akhdar) is the visual mark of his pure, Qurayshī
    background, being born of a pure Arab mother and father.
    The Quraysh consisted of several sub-clans. Abd al-Muããalib and his descendents, including
    Muhammad, belonged to the Banå Hashim. Henry Lammens takes notice of “les Haśimites, famille où
    dominait le sang nègre” (“the Hashimites, the family where Black blood dominated”).12 Lammens
    remarks that they are “généralement qualifies de آدم = couleur foncée” (“generally described as adam =
    dark colored”). But the Banå Hashim were not the only sub-clans noted for their blackness. The Banå
    Zuhra, the tribe from which the prophet’s mother, Amīa bt. Wahb, hailed, was likewise noted for its
    blackness. See for example the famous Saad ibn Abī Waqqās ( 646), cousin of Amīa and uncle of
    Muhammad. He is described as very dark, tall and flat-nosed.13 Muhammad, it should be noted, was
    quite proud of his uncle Saad whose military contributions we shall discuss below. We are told that once
    Muhammad was sitting with some of his companions and Saad walked by. The prophet stopped and
    taunted: “That’s my uncle. Let any man show me his uncle.”14
    This blackness of the Quraysh tribe is not insignificant to the religious history of Islam. The Quraysh
    were the custodians of the cult of the Ka’ba in pre-Qurʾanic Mecca and at religious ceremonies they
    would declare naÈnu ahlu ÏÏahi (“We are the People of AÏÏah”) and throughout Arabia they were known as
    ahlu ÏÏah, the People of AÏÏah.15 In other words, the black tribe par excellence was also the AÏÏah-tribe par
    excellence and custodians of the cult of the Black God. Nevertheless, or rather as a consequence,
    Muhammad’s greatest struggle was with his own kinsmen, this black, AÏÏah-venerating Quraysh tribe. In
    the end, however, it would be the black Quraysh that became the rulers of Islam, at least in the short
    term. Not only were the Sunni caliphs drawn from them, but the Shiite Imams, descendents of the black
    Alī b. Abå Talib, were likewise black QurayshÊ Arabs.16
    One would thus expect the Qurayshī prophet Muhammad to be black too, especially since he
    reportedly claimed to be a pure Arab for the house of Hashim17: this would make him very black-skinned
    like the pure Arabs from that tribe. Muhammad’s pedigree actually demands this as his whole immediate
    family tree were pure, black-skinned Qurayshī Arabs. I quote again Al-JaÈií’s important note in his Fakhr
    al-sådan ala al-bidan:

    The ten lordly sons of Abd al Muããalib were deep black (dalham) in color and big/tall (dukhm). When
    Amir b. al-Tufayl saw them circumambulating (the Ka’ba) like dark camels, he said, “With such men as these
    is the custody of the Ka’ba preserved.” Abd Allah b. Abbas was very black and tall. Those of Abå Talib’s
    family, who are the most noble of men, are more or less black (såd).”18
    Abd al Muããalib (d. 578) was the prophet’s grandfather and Abd Allāh, one of his ten ‘deep black’
    sons, was Muhammad’s father. Another deep black son, al-Abbās, was father to the above mentioned
    Abd Allah b. Abbās, described as black, and al-Fa∙l b. al-Abbas, whose blackness was legendary.
    These were the uncle and first cousins of Muhammad. Abå Talib, another deep black uncle, was father
    to Alī b. Abd Allāh, another first cousin of the prophet who was described as jet-black. All of these
    father-son pairs shared this deep blackness, what about the Abd Allāh – Muhammad pair? We would
    expect the same, unless Muhammad’s mother made a mitigating contribution. But this is not likely.
    Amina, the prophet’s mother, was an Arab from the Qurayshī sub-clan Banå Zuhra, which was a black
    clan. Amina’s cousin and Muhammad’s maternal uncle, Saad ibn Abī Waqqās, also from Banå Zuhra,
    was very dark, tall and flat-nosed.19

    But Muhammad had more than just Qurayshī blackness running through his veins. His great, great
    grandfather was Abd Manaf who bore with $tika bt. Murra al-SulaymÊ the prophet’s great
    grandfather \ashim. That is to say that the prophet’s great, great grandmother was from the jet-black
    Banå Sulaym. \ashim, the great grandfather, bore with Salma bt. Amrå ’l-KhazrajÊ the prophet’s
    grandfather, Abd al Muããalib. This means that his paternal great grandmother was from the black
    Medinese tribe Banå Khazraj. Abd al Muããalib stayed within the Quraysh, but he bore the prophet’s
    father Abd Allāh with Faãima bt. Amrå al-MakhzåmÊ, from the exceptionally black Makhzåm
    clan.20 Muhammad’s maternal lineage is also mixed with non-QurayshÊ black Arab blood. His mother,
    Amina, is the daughter of Wahb b. Abd Manaf b. Zuhra whose mother (Amina’s grandmother) is
    said to be a SulaymÊ, another $tika bt. Al-Awqaß.21 The black Sulaym are thus considered the
    maternal uncles of the prophet and he is therefore reported to have said: “I am the son of the many
    $tikas of Sulaym.”22 This all indicates that Muhammad’s lineage is a mix of QurayshÊ, SulaymÊ, and
    KhazrajÊ blackness.

    We thus have every reason to expect Muhammad to be black-skinned, and no reason to believe
    anything else was possible. We in fact find him described as such in TirmidhÊ’s Shamaʾil al-
    Muhammadiyyah. The following is reported on the authority of the famous Companion of the prophet,
    Anas b. Malik:

    The Messenger of Allah… was of medium stature, neither tall nor short, of a goodly build. His hair was
    neither curly nor completely straight. He had a dark brown (asmar) complexion and when he walked he leant
    forward [walking briskly].23

    أسمر asmar is a dark brown as evidenced from other formations from the same root24: samar “darkness,
    night”; al-garra al-samraʾ “the black continent (Africa)”.25 With the pedigree that he had, any other
    complexion for Muhammad would be incomprehensible. Yet, the same Anas b. Malik who informed us
    of the dark brown complexion of the prophet, also informs us thusly:
    While we were sitting with the Prophet in the mosque, a man came riding on a camel. He made his camel
    kneel down in the mosque, tied its foreleg and then said: “Who amongst you is Muhammad?” At that time
    the Prophet was sitting amongst us (his companions) leaning on his arm. We replied, “This white man
    reclining on his arm.”26

    There are several other reports that describe Muhammad as أبیض abya∙ white. How can the same
    man (Anas b. Malik) describe another (Muhammad) as both of dark brown complexion and as white?
    The problem, it turns out, is not in these texts but in our modern, Western inability to appreciate the premodern
    Arabic color classification system. We assume that terms such as white, green, blue, and red
    meant the same to the early Arabs that they do to us today. But as Moroccan scholar Tariq Berry explains
    in his book, The Unknown Arabs, this is simply not the case:
    The term white can be very confusing to those reading about the description of people of the past because, in the past,
    when Arabs described someone as white, they meant something entirely different from what is meant today. In the past,
    when the Arabs described someone as white, they meant either that he had a pure, noble, essence or that he had a nice,
    smooth complexion without any blemishes. They meant he had a black complexion with a light-brownish undertone.27
    Berry’s point is confirmed by the appropriate Classical Arabic/Islamic sources. Ibn Maníår affirmed that
    “When the Arabs say that a person is white, they mean that he has a pure, clean, fautless integrity…They
    don’t mean that he has white skin…”28 Similarly, al-Dhahabī informs us that “When the Arabs say a
    person is white, they mean he is black with a light-brownish undertone.”29 Particularly important was the
    observation of the 9th century CE Arabic scholar Thalab, who tells us that : “The Arabs don’t say that a
    man is white because of a white complexion. White to the Arabs means that a person is pure, without any
    faults. If they meant his complexion was white, they said ‘red’ (aÈmar).”30 Indeed, as David Goldenberg
    notes, ‘white أبیض ’ in pre-modern Arabic was about “luminosity, not chromaticity.”31 That is to say, أبیض
    connoted brilliance, not paleness of skin. The latter was described as ‘red’ أ حمر aÈmar, which is how non-
    Arab whites such as Persians and Byzantines were described.32 In other words, what we call white today
    the early Arabs called red, and what they called white often was what we would today call black!
    It is certain that Muhammad could not have been what we consider white today; he could not have
    been fair or pale-skinned at all, for a pale-skinned Arab was such an oddity that the prophet could not
    have claimed be a pure QurayshÊ Arab. The seventh century Arab from the tribe of Nakhāʾī, Shurayk al-
    Qā∙ī, could claim that, because it was such a rare occurrence “a fair-skinned Arab is something
    inconceivable and unthinkable.”33 So too did al-Dhahabī report that: “Red, in the language of the people
    from the Hijaz, means fair-complexioned and this color is rare amongst the Arabs.”34 On the other hand,
    the Arabs prided themselves on being black, is conscious contrast to the pale-skinned non-Arabs. Al-JaÈií
    could still claim in the 9th century:
    العرب تفخر بسواد اللون
    al-arab tafkhar bi-sawad al-lawn
    “The Arabs pride themselves in (their) black color”35

    These noble Black Arabs even detested pale skin. Al-Mubarrad (d. 898), the leading figure in the Basran
    grammatical tradition, is quoted as saying: “The Arabs used to take pride in their darkness and blackness
    and they had a distaste for a light complexion and they used to say that a light complexion was the
    complexion of the non-Arabs”. Part of the reason for this distaste is that the slaves at the time were largely
    from pale-skinned peoples, such that aÈmar “red” came to mean “slave” back then, just as abid
    “servant/slave” means black today in the now white Muslim world. As Dana Marniche observes:
    Anyone familiar with the Arabic writings of the Syrian, Iraqi and Iranian historians up until the 14th century
    knows that this is also their description of the early ‘pure’ Arab clans of the Arabian peninsula… [i.e. “blacker
    than the blackest ink – no shred of white on them except their teeth.”]…The irony of history is that early
    Arabic-speaking historians and linguists made a distinction between the Arabs in Arabia and the fair-skinned
    peoples to the north; and contrary to what may be fact in our day, in the days of early Islam, those called
    ‘Arabs’ looked down condescendingly on fair-skinned populations and commonly used the phrase ‘fairskinned
    as a slave’ when describing individuals in tribes in the peninsula that were pale in complexion…Of
    course, today due mainly to slavery and conversion of peoples to the ‘Arab’ nationality, the opposite is
    thought to be true by many in the West.

    A red or pale-skinned Muhammad would thus have been a profound oddity in 7th century Arabia and
    would have had little chance of success amongst the proud, black Meccans and Medinese. The Meccan
    objectors to his message accused of some of everything, but never of being a non-Arab! There is absolutely no
    reason to believe he was pale-skinned other than much later representations that coincide with a major
    demographic change it the Muslim world, a change that brought with it a strong anti-black ideology.36
    We thus have every reason to accept the truth of Anas b. Malik’s description of the prophet as dark
    brown (asmar) and to conclude that, as his black cousins Alī and al-Fa∙l resembled their black fathers (his
    black uncles), he resembled his black father, especially since his mother’s side was black as well.37

    • can you explain why blacks including those that are muslims are treated as second class citizen in the Sudan and the rest of the Arab world? Muhhamed and the Arabs being black does not change the fact the Islam is an arab supremamcist, racist anti-black religion. islamic writings in the hadith all have anti-black racism. the arab word abd or abeed means slave and black.

      The Character Abraham is a fictional character and is a retelling of the story of the Hindu Diety Brahman

      racism in islamic writings you ignore

      Arabs are the most noble people in lineage, the most prominent, and the best in deeds. We were the first to respond to the call of the Prophet. We are Allah’s helpers and the viziers of His Messenger. We fight people until they believe in Allah. He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for one who disbelieves, we will fight him forever in Allah’s Cause. Killing him is a small matter to us.
      Al-Tabari, Vol. 9, p. 69

      Ali Ibn Abi Talib, said: Verily the Prophet said: God divided the earth in two halves and placed (me) in the better of the two, then He divided the half in three parts, and I was in the best of them, then He chose the Arabs from among the people, then He chose the Quraysh from among the Arabs, then He chose the children of ‘Abd al-Muttalib from among the Banu Hashim, then he chose me from among the children of ‘Abd al-Muttalib, and from them he chose me.[1]
      Ibn Sa’d, Vol. 1, p. 12

      Shem, the son of Noah was the father of the Arabs, the Persians, and the Greeks; Ham was the father of the Black Africans; and Japheth was the father of the Turks and of Gog and Magog who were cousins of the Turks. 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

      islamic writers and scholars also preached anti-black racism

      Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406) was, among other things, an Islamic jurist, Islamic lawyer, Islamic scholar, Islamic theologian, and hafiz
      “Therefore, the Negro nation are, as a rule, submissive to slavery, because [Negroes] have little [that is essentially] human and have attributes that are quite similar to those of dumb animals, as we have stated.”[3]
      Ibn Khaldun, Muqaddimah, 14th century

      Ibn Sina or Avicenna (980-1037), was, among other things, a Hafiz, Islamic psychologist, Islamic scholar, and Islamic theologian
      [Blacks are] people who are by their very nature slaves.[4]
      Quoted in “Blasphemy Before God: The Darkness of Racism In Muslim Culture” by Adam Misbah aI-Haqq

      The following excerpt from “The Crisis of Identity in Northern Sudan: A Dilemma of a Black people with a White Culture”, by Al-Baqir al-Afif Mukhtar, gives an insight into the melonophobia and Negrophobia that Arab culture has reeked of since before the 7 th century AD:

      ” The contempt towards . . . the dark skinned is expressed in a thousand ways in the documents, literature and art that have come down to us from the Islamic Middle Ages. . . . This literature, and especially popular literature, depicts (the black man) in the form of hostile stereotypes– as a demon in fairy tales, as a savage in the stories of travel and adventure, or commonly as a lazy stupid, evilsmelling and lecherous slave. . . . Ibn Khaldun sees the blacks as “characterized by levity and excitability and great emotionalism” and [says] that “they are everywhere described as stupid” . . . al-Dimashqi had the following to say: “The Equator is inhabited by communities of blacks who may be numbered among the savage beasts. Their complexion and hair are burnt and they are physically and morally abnormal. Their brains almost boil from the sun’s heat.” Ibn al-Faqih al-Hamadhani follows the same line of reasoning. To him . . . the zanj . . .are “overdone until they are burned so that the child comes out between black, murky, malodorous, stinking, and crinkly-haired, with uneven limbs, deficient minds, and depraved passions” . . . ”

      The following excerpt [from “Blasphemy Before God: The Darkness of Racism In Muslim Culture” by Adam Misbah aI-Haqq, MuslimWakeup.Com ] shows how and why Arabs incurably believe in enslaving blacks:

      ” Classic Muslim thought maintained that blacks became legitimate slaves by virtue of the color of their skin. The justification of the early Muslim equation of blackness with servitude was found in the Genesis story so popularly called “the curse of Ham,” in reference to one of Noah’s sons . .

      . .In the Arab- Muslim version, blacks are cursed to be slaves and menials, Arabs are blessed to be prophets and nobles, while Turks and Slavs are destined to be kings and tyrants. . . . The famous Al-Tabari, for example, cites no less than six Prophetic traditions which seek to support this story. One tradition reads:

      Ham begat all those who are black and curly-haired, while Japheth begat those who are full faced with small eyes, and Shem begat everyone who is handsome of face (Arabs of course) with beautiful hair. Noah prayed that the hair of Ham’s descendants would not grow past their ears, and wherever his descendants met the children of Shem, the latter would enslave them. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal reported a saying attributed to the Prophet which in effect states that God created the white race (dhurriyyah bayd) from the right shoulder of Adam and created the black race (dhurriyyah sawd) from Adam’s left shoulder. Those of Adam’s right shoulder would enter Paradise and those of the left, Perdition. Other equally racist sayings have been attributed to the Prophet in the traditions. Contradicting this spirit, there are the sayings of the Prophet which equate the value of a person to his God-consciousness (taqwa), and to their piety without any regard to the tribal or ethnocentric concerns of a racist purport.

      Such [egalitarian] reports [were overshadowed by] the more deeply rooted tradition of racial bigotry . . . [emphasized by] Muslim geographers and travelers who ventured into Africa. . . . Al-Maqdisi wrote, ” . . . As for the Zanji, they are people of black color, flat noses, kinky hair, and little understanding or intelligence.” . . . Ibn Kha ldun (d. 1406CE) added that blacks are “only humans who are closer to dumb animals than to rational beings.” . . . Even such luminaries as Ibn Sina considered blacks to be “people who are by their very nature slaves.” . . .

      The creation or resurgence of the mythology of Ham also made dark- skinned people synonymous with servitude in light-skinned Muslim thinking. This went so far that eventually the term abd (slave) went through a semantic development and came to specifically refer to “black slave” while light- skinned slaves were referred to as mamluks. And further on in later usage, the Arabic word abd came to mean “black man” of whatever status. . . . “


    Over 28 Million Africans have been enslaved in the Muslim world during the past 14 centuries While much has been written concerning the Transatlantic slave trade, surprisingly little attention has been given to the Islamic slave trade across the Sahara, the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.
    While the European involvement in the Transatlantic slave trade to the Americas lasted for just over three centuries, the Arab involvement in the slave trade has lasted fourteen centuries, and in some parts of the Muslim world is still continuing to this day. A comparison of the Muslim slave trade to the American slave trade reveals some interesting contrasts.
    While two out of every three slaves shipped across the Atlantic were men, the proportions were reversed in the Muslim slave trade.
    Two women for every man were enslaved by the Muslims.
    While the mortality rate for slaves being transported across the Atlantic was as high as 10%, the percentage of slaves dying in transit in the Transsahara and East African slave trade was between 80 and 90%!
    While almost all the slaves shipped across the Atlantic were for agricultural work, most of the slaves destined for the Muslim Middle East were for sexual exploitation as concubines, in harems, and for military service.
    While many children were born to slaves in the Americas, and millions of their descendants are citizens in Brazil and the USA to this day, very few descendants of the slaves that ended up in the Middle East survive.

    Greek philosopher Aristotle (384 – 322 BC) made major contributions to biological and reproductive theory that would hold sway until the Renaissance period. For instance, his notion that conception originates solely from male seed, implanted into an otherwise dormant female body dominated reproductive discourse for centuries after his death.
    More than 2,000 years after Aristotle asserted that men were the real reproductive powerhouses, Dr. Martin Berry finally figured out that it takes two to make a thing go right. At last disproving the ancient Greek philosopher, Berry established that human conception occurs when sperm fertilizes an egg.
    While most slaves who went to the Americas could marry and have families, most of the male slaves destined for the Middle East were castrated, and most of the children born to the women were killed at birth.
    It is estimated that possibly as many as 11 million Africans were transported across the Atlantic (95% of which went to South and Central America, mainly to Portuguese, Spanish and French possessions. Only 5% of the slaves went to the United States).
    A comparison of the Muslim slave trade to the American slave trade reveals some interesting contrasts. While two out of every three slaves shipped across the Atlantic were men, the proportions were reversed in the Muslim slave trade. Two women for every man were enslaved by the Muslims.
    While the mortality rate for slaves being transported across the Atlantic was as high as 10%, the percentage of slaves dying in transit in the Transsahara and East African slave trade was between 80 and 90%!
    While almost all the slaves shipped across the Atlantic were for agricultural work, most of the slaves destined for the Muslim Middle East were for sexual exploitation as concubines, in harems, and for military service.
    While many children were born to slaves in the Americas, and millions of their descendants are citizens in Brazil and the USA to this day, very few descendants of the slaves that ended up in the Middle East survive.
    While most slaves who went to the Americas could marry and have families, most of the male slaves destined for the Middle East were castrated, and most of the children born to the women were killed at birth. It is estimated that possibly as many as 11 million Africans were transported across the Atlantic (95% of which went to South and Central America, mainly to Portuguese, Spanish and French possessions. Only 5% of the slaves went to the United States).
    While Christian Reformers spearheaded the antislavery abolitionist movements in Europe and North America, and Great Britain mobilized her Navy, throughout most of the 19th Century, to intercept slave ships and set the captives free, there was no comparable opposition to slavery within the Muslim world.
    Even after Britain outlawed the slave trade in 1807 and Europe abolished the slave trade in 1815, Muslim slave traders enslaved a further 2 million Africans. This despite vigorous British Naval activity and military intervention to limit the Muslim slave trade.
    By some calculations the number of victims of the 14 centuries of Muslim slave trade could exceed 180 million. Nearly 100 years after President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in America, and 130 years after all slaves within the British Empire were set free by parliamentary decree, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, in 1962, and Mauritania in 1980, begrudgingly removed legalized slavery from their statute books.
    And this only after international pressure was brought to bear. Today numerous international organizations document that slavery still continues in some Muslim countries.
    Reports on slavery in Sudan, Mauritania for instance needs looking into. Recently, a former slave from the Nuba Mountains of Sudan, Mende Nazer, had her autobiography: “Slave: My True Story” published. Mende Nazer was an alleged slave in Sudan. She was made famous by her transfer to England to serve a diplomatic family.
    Mende Nazer reports that she was abducted and sold into slavery in Sudan when she was a child of twelve or thirteen (she doesn’t know when she was born). She lived in a village of the Karko Nuba in the Nuba mountains of Sudan with her family. The village was attacked one night. Mende fled with her family into the mountains.
    She became separated from her family, and when a man caught her and told her he would protect her, she believed him. She had already seen people killed in front of her. The man told her to stay with a group of children.
    Later, the raiders came and took all of the children to the town of Dilling, there the children were taken by families to serve as servants.
    Mende also reports that she was taken by a woman from Khartoum whom she served for six or seven years. She had to do all the hard work of the household, and sleep on the floor of the garden shed.
    She was never paid anything for her labor, and was frequently beaten. She wanted to leave, but had no money and nowhere to go, and was afraid to go to the police. The woman of the house said that she owned Mende, and called Mende her ‘Abda’, or slave.
    Eventually Mende was sent to London to work as a domestic. After several months Mende escaped and claimed asylum. At first, the Home Office rejected her claim in October 2002. In November, the Home Office overturned its decision and granted Mende asylum.
    Racism is one of the greatest criminal acts practiced by man against man. And Islam is the most racist, bigoted, discriminatory ideology ever created by man.
    Racism is the belief that inherent different traits in human racial groups justify discrimination. It is applied especially to the practice or advocacy of racial discrimination of a pernicious nature (i.e. which harms particular groups of people). Modern usage often equates “racism” and “racial discrimination” and defines the latter term only as applying to pernicious practices.
    Racism is popularly associated with various activities that are illegal or commonly considered harmful, such as extremism, hatred, xenophobia, (malignant or forced) exploitation, separatism, racial supremacy, mass murder (for the purpose of genocide), genocide denial, vigilantism (hate crimes, terrorism), etc.
    WHY ISLAM IS THE MOST RACIST IDEOLOGY EVER CONCEIVED BY MAN? As you will read, Arabs believe they are a superior race and have the right to rape, torture, kill because the Quran being in Arabic non-Arabic people are inferior and are to be treated like slaves. This is sanctified by God in the Quran.
    All human beings, irrespective of race or color, are created equal in terms of rights and dignity. Assuming that one human being is lesser than another and worth being a slave or property of another person is abhorrent to civilized conscience. Slavery is one of the vilest institutions ever created by man. Slavery is a form of vile racism.
    In Islam, God is a slaver, who sanctions enslaving other people by Muslims in the Quran. Prophet Muhammad was a slaver, who took 20% from the profits derived from the sale of slaves. He also owned 40 slaves. He beat and raped his slaves. He hated the Blacks and compared them to Satan. Some 120 million Blacks were murdered by Muslims, the greatest holocaust in history. Of hunted Black slaves, some 75% of them died on the way to Islamic markets. All Black male slaves were castrated. While most black slaves sent to the Americas could marry and have families, most of the male black slaves destined for the Muslim world were castrated. Millions more died in the unhygienic operation for castrating them, and most of the black children born to the women were killed at birth.
    It was noted that black slaves were castrated “based on the assumption that the blacks had an ungovernable sexual appetite.
    Below are some of the commands of Islamic God, sanctioning slavery:
    Sura 2 (The Cow), Verse 178:
    “O you who believe! retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the slain, the free for the free, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female, but if any remission is made to any one by his (aggrieved) brother, then prosecution (for the bloodwit) should be made according to usage, and payment should be made to him in a good manner; this is an alleviation from your Lord and a mercy; so whoever exceeds the limit after this he shall have a painful chastisement.”
    Slavery is mentioned in this verse as part of Islam’s criminal law clearly indicating that slavery is an eternal divine institution in Islam, a part and parcel of Islamic societies.
    Sura 24 (The Light), Verse 31:
    “And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers, or the fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their women, or those whom their right hands possess, or the male servants not having need (of women), or the children who have not attained knowledge of what is hidden of women; and let them not strike their feet so that what they hide of their ornaments may be known; and turn to Allah all of you, O believers! so that you may be successful.”
    This is the famous Sura enjoining the veiling of women. Those before whom the Muslim women need not veil themselves are “those whom their right hands possess”, which means “slaves”. Again God mentions slavery in this verse as a part and parcel of Muslim households. Therefore, slaves are an inseparable part of Muslim societies.
    Sura 23 (The Believers), Verses 1-6:
    “Successful indeed are the believers, Who are humble in their prayers, And who keep aloof from what is vain, And who are givers of poor-rate, And who guard their private parts, Except before their mates or those whom their right hands possess, for they surely are not blameable.”
    This verses not only sanctions the practice of slavery, but also gives the slave owner unfettered right to use female slaves sexual pleasures.
    Sura 24 (The Light), Verse 32:
    “And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves; if they are needy, Allah will make them free from want out of His grace; and Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing.”
    This is said to sanction marriages of slaves with slaves and slaves with free persons (including the owner). Owners did not usually marry slaves as they could use them for sexual purposes at will. This dispensation has been used to make slaves marry other slaves. In Islam a child born to a slave couple also is a slave from birth, so this verse gives a great incentive to slave owners to breed slaves. This is another obnoxious aspect of Islamic slavery. Whatever be the other circumstances in which people are made into slaves to make a new-born infant a slave is one of the most cruel and callous. Ye this did not evoke a protest from the Prophet and has been extensively resorted to by Muslims.
    Sura 16 (The Bee), verse 75:
    “Allah sets forth a parable: (consider) a slave, the property of another, (who) has no power over anything, and one whom We have granted from Ourselves a goodly sustenance so he spends from it secretly and openly; are the two alike? (All) praise is due to Allah!”
    This is one of the clearest instances where the institution of slavery is justified in the Quran as a divine dispensation. It deserves close scrutiny. This “parable” contrasts two people a slave who is owned by another and is completely powerless and a freeman on whom Allah has granted “a goodly sustenance” which he can spend openly or secretly as he pleases (perhaps acquiring slaves for himself). Since Allah claims for himself the position of the granter of all benefits (or lack of them) both the freeman’s fortune and the slave’s misfortune are ultimately determined by Allah. By his rhetorical question — “Are the two alike?” — Allah was actually justifying the inequality between the slave and the freeman as a natural thing. Thus a Muslim will have no compunctions or qualms in employing and exploiting slaves (subject only to any conditions that Muhammad may have imposed) because it is what Allah has ordained and “all praise is due to Allah”.
    Sura 33 (The Clans), Verse 50:
    “O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those [slaves] whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts, and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who fled with you; and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to marry her – specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers; We know what We have ordained for them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess in order that no blame may attach to you; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful”.
    As stated before – here, as elsewhere, the term “possessions of the right hand” mean slaves. It is expressly stated that Muhammad’s slaves are given to him by Allah himself to be taken out of his share of the captives in war. It also records the special dispensation given to Muhammad, not available to other Muslims, in the number of wives.
    Sura 39 (The Companions), Verses 29:
    “Allah sets forth an example: There is a slave in whom are (several) partners differing with one another, and there is another slave wholly owned by one man. Are the two alike in condition? (All) praise is due to Allah. Nay! most of them do not know.”
    The example set out here compares joint ownership of a slave by many owners and the single ownership by one person. Allah asks rhetorically whether the two cases are the same. Of course, they are not and it is clear that Muhammad prefers single ownership. In fact, this is why he established the rule that after a military campaign the captives were allocated to each of his soldiers individually not collectively, with himself keeping a fifth of the captives as his personal slaves.
    Sura 70 (The Ways of Ascent), verses 29-35:
    “And those who guard their private parts, Except in the case of their wives or those whom their right hands possess — for these surely are not to be blamed, But he who seeks to go beyond this, these it is that go beyond the limits — And those who are faithful to their trusts and their covenant And those who are upright in their testimonies, And those who keep a guard on their prayer, Those shall be in gardens, honored.”
    These verses are similar to Sura 23.93-96 and gives the right to slave owners to have sexual relation with female slaves. The only difference is that the earlier reference may leave some doubt as to whether both males and female slaves are meant. These verses clearly show that it is only female slaves that are meant.
    Quran 4:3:
    “Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.”
    This verse is saying a Muslim man can have sex with his female slaves (obtained in war) just like with married wives (up to four). The divine institution of Islamic slavery, including the sex-slavery, is the vilest of institutions ever created in history.
    Allah, the Islamic God, thus, sanctions slavery as well as use of female slaves for pleasures of men – the vilest practice, albeit an divinely-sanctioned one, ever exercised by man. (For article titled, Islam, Slavery and Rape, go to:
    Following is just a small sample of more teachings of God’s divine institution of slavery.
    Muhammad’s position on freeing slaves
    1) In one instance, a man freed a slave that he kept as a sexual partner. When Muhammad heard what happened, he auctioned the boy and sold him for 800 dirhams to Na-eem Ebn Abdullah Al- Nahham. (Sahih Muslim, vol. 7, p. 83)
    2) According to Muhammad, the punishment for committing adultery is different with a free-woman and a slave-woman. The man must be flogged one-hundred stripes and be exiled for one year. The free woman must be stoned to death. But the slave-woman (since she has a monetary value) will not be exiled or killed, she is to be flogged one-hundred stripes. If the violation is repeated, the slave-woman is to be sold. (Sahih Al Bukhari vol. 8:821 & 822)
    Islam Looked Down on Blacks
    Islam’s sacred texts contain explicit denigrating remarks about black people.
    Muhammad referred to Blacks as “raisin heads”. (Sahih al-Bukhari 1.662, 9.256).
    In another Hadith, Muhammad is quoted as saying that Blacks are “pug-nosed slaves”. (Sahih Muslim vol. 9, p. 46-47).
    A Slave is not Entitled to Property or Money
    Ibn Hazm says in Vol. 6, Part 9,
    “The slave is not permitted to write a will when he dies, nor can he bequeath (anything) because his entire possessions belong to his master.”
    Testimony of Slaves inadmissible
    In Vol. 35, p. 409 Ibn Timiyya remarks:
    “The Shafi’i, Malik, and Abu Hanifa, who are the legists of Islam, assert that the testimony of the slave is not acceptable.”
    The “Ordinances of the Qur’an” by the Shafi’i (part II, p. 142), stipulates that,
    “The witnesses must be from among our freeman, not from our slaves, but from freeman who belong to our religion!”
    1. The Slave cannot choose for himself.
    This was confirmed by all the Muslim scholars on the authority of Muhammad. In Vol. 6, Part 9, p. 467, Ibn Hazm said,
    “If a slave gets married without the permission of his master, his marriage will be invalid and he must be whipped because he has committed adultery. He must be separated from his wife. She is also regarded as an adulteress because Muhammad said, ‘Any slave who gets married without the approval of his master is a prostitute.'”
    The same text is quoted by Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (Part 5, p. 117 of “Zad al-Maad”), as well as Ibn Timiyya (Vol. 32, p. 201). Malik Ibn Anas relates (Vol. 2, Part 4) more than that. He says (pp. 199, 201, 206),
    “The slave does not get married without the approval of his master. If he is a slave to two masters, he has to obtain the approval of both men.”
    2. The male slave and the female slave are forced to get married.
    Malik Ibn Anas says explicitly,
    “The master has the right to force his male or female slave to marry without obtaining their approval” (Vol. 2, p. 155).
    “The master does not have the right to force the female slave to wed to an ugly black slave if she is beautiful and agile unless in case of utmost necessity” (refer to Ibn Hazm, Vol. 6, Part 9, p. 469).
    In matters of sex and marriage, Ibn Timiyya states:
    “The one who owns the mother also owns her children. Being the master of the mother makes him the owner of her children whether they were born to a husband or they were illegitimate children. Therefore, the master has the right to have sexual intercourse with the daughters of his maid-slave because they are his property, provided he does not sleep with the mother at the same time” (Vol. 35, p. 54).
    Price of Slaves
    “If an owned slave assaults somebody and damages his property, his crime will be tied to his neck. It will be said to his master, ‘If you wish, you can pay the fine for the damages done by your slave or deliver him to be sentenced to death.’ His master has to choose one of the two options – either the value of the slave and his price or the damage the slave has caused” (Vol. 32, p. 202, Ibn Timiyya).
    Ishaq, p. 243:
    “I heard the Apostle say: ‘Whoever wants to see Satan should look at Nabtal!’ He was a black man with long flowing hair, inflamed eyes, and dark ruddy cheeks…. Allah sent down concerning him: ‘To those who annoy the Prophet there is a painful doom.” [9:61] “Gabriel came to Muhammad and said, ‘If a black man comes to you his heart is more gross than a donkey’s.'”
    Ishaq, p. 144:
    “A rock was put on a slave’s chest. When Abu Bakr complained, they said, ‘You are the one who corrupted him, so save him from his plight.’ I will do so,’ said Bakr. ‘I have a black slave, tougher and stronger than Bilal, who is a heathen. I will exchange him. The transaction was carried out.”
    Tabari, II:11:
    “Shem, the son of Noah was the father of the Arabs, the Persians, and the Greeks; Ham was the father of the Black Africans; and Japheth was the father of the Turks and of Gog and Magog who were cousins of the Turks. 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.”
    Tabari, II:21:
    “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.”
    Ishaq, p. 450:
    “It is your folly to fight the Apostle, for Allah’s army is bound to disgrace you. We brought them to the pit. Hell was their meeting place. We collected them there, black slaves, men of no descent.”
    Bukhari 4.52.137:
    “The Prophet said, ‘Let the negro slave of Dinar perish. And if he is pierced with a thorn, let him not find anyone to take it out for him…. If he [the black slave] asks for anything it shall not be granted, and if he needs intercession [to get into paradise], his intercession will be denied.'”
    Slavery, raping slave girls, owning slaves, selling boys and women as trophies of war, sharing the booty (including slaves) obtained in raids and wars with Allah are all central teachings of Islam. Slavery was one of the major driving forces behind the expansion of Islam. After assuming his prophetic career, Prophet Muhammad enslaved large number of men and women, owned dozens of slaves, he sold many slaves as well as used the female captives as sex-slaves on top his dozen wives. Islam is such as vile, evil cult, which has been embraced by today’s civilized world’s 1.2 billion people as the perfect guide to life and its Prophet as perfect human being, the greatest apostle of God, a man of peace.
    Today, tens of millions of Blacks—whose forefathers were the worst victim of Muhammad’s cult—also eulogize this man, and call themselves proud Muslims. There cannot be anything more shameful than this.

    Jamie Glazov
    Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Bill Warner, the director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam (CSPI) and spokesman for CSPI’s goal is to teach the doctrine of political Islam through its books and it has produced an eleven book series on political Islam. Mr. Warner did not write the CSPI series, but he acts as the agent for a group of scholars who are the authors. The Center’s latest book is The Submission of Women and Slaves, Islamic Duality.
    FP: Bill Warner, welcome back to Frontpage Magazine. This is the second part in our two-part series with you on the Center’s most recent book. In the first part we discussed Islam and its doctrine on the submission of women. In this second and final part we will discuss the matter of slavery. Welcome to Frontpage Interview.
    Warner: It is a pleasure to work with Frontpage.
    FP: So tell us in general where Islam stands on slavery.
    Warner: Islam’s stand on slavery is based on its political principles of submission and duality. The principle of submission could not be clearer. By definition a slave is the most submissive of all people. You become a slave only when you have no more choices. A slave has completely submitted to a master.
    The principle of duality is shown by the fact that Islam does not enslave Muslims, only kafirs (non-Muslims). Since only kafirs are enslaved, it assures that more of the world submits to Islam.
    Islamic slavery is based on the Trilogy of the Koran, the Sira (Mohammed’s life) and the Hadith (the Traditions of Mohammed). All three texts say that slavery is permitted, ethical, desirable and a virtue. There is not one single negative word about slavery.
    Slavery is seen as a process that brings kafirs to Islam. It is a virtue to free slaves, but Mohammed only freed slaves who submitted to Islam. If the kafir slave does not submit, then their children will. So given enough time, slaves convert to Islam. That is one of the reasons that Islam sees slavery as a positive.
    Of course, there is another reason that Islam sees slavery as being so “good” and that is the money. Mohammed and the other jihadists made a fortune out of enslaving kafirs. Mohammed used the money for more jihad. So slavery financed the spread of Islam and jihad from the beginning.
    FP: What were the ingredients of Mohammed’s own life in terms of slavery?
    Warner: Mohammed is the perfect pattern for all humanity and his life was saturated in slavery. When his mother died, it was a freed slave who nursed him. His first wife owned slaves. One of his first converts was a slave. His closest friend, Abu Bakr, traded one of his black kafir slaves for a Muslim who was enslaved by a kafir.
    But all of this was small change compared to his envolvement with slavery once he turned to jihad. In his first major battle at Badr, he stood by and prayed as his henchmen beat and tortured captured slaves to get information about the enemy kafirs.
    Slaves made Mohammed’s pulpit. Slaves mended his cloths, cooked his food, and did every thing that a slave does for the master. He gave away slaves as gifts and received them as gifts. He went to war to kill the males so that the remaining people would surrender to be sold as slaves. Mohammed sold slaves on both the retail and wholesale markets.
    He offered captured slaves their freedom if they would first agree that he was the prophet of Allah. A kafir slave then became a slave of Allah, because all Muslims are slaves of Allah. For a slave, the religion of Mohammed started and ended with slavery.
    FP: Can you talk a bit about Islam and sexual slavery?
    Warner: All morality in Islam is patterned after the example of Mohammed. Everything that he did and said defines what is permitted or “good”. Mohammed repeatedly sanctioned forced sex (rape) with kafir females after they were captured. The Hadith clearly reports that he got first choice of the women. In one case, he repeatedly demanded one particular woman for himself and swapped two other kafir slave women for his choice. So if Mohammed was involved in the rape of kafirs, then rape is a virtue, not a sin or error.
    When Mohammed destroyed the B. Qurayza tribe, all of the adult male Jews were beheaded, so that no husbands were left. Mohammed then took the children and gave them to Muslims to raise as Muslims and he sold off the Jewish women as slaves.
    We know from another story that the women were divided into sex slaves and domestic slaves. In one scene, a jihadist is trying to obtain a high ransom for a woman and he is told that her breasts are flat and her mouth is cold, so her value was less. In short, she was only good for work around the house, not in the bedroom.
    The Hadith tells of another story where the Muslims used coitus interruptus to avoid impregnating the kafir sex slaves. The reason was purely for business. If the kafir sex slave was pregnant, then she was worth less money.
    Islamic doctrine says that kafir women should not be used for prostitutes, only for the pleasure of the master.
    When Mohammed attacked the Jews at Khaybar, many moral precedents were set. Sexual slavery received an entire set of rules. Muslims were not to rape pregnant or menstruating women until they had delivered the child or finished their periods. At Khaybar, Mohammed’s god Allah, announced that even married women were fair game for rape.
    Mohammed only killed some of the Jews at Khaybar. The male and female survivors were needed to work the land as dhimmis. (The original dhimmis were semi-slaves with no civil rights. Today, dhimmis are ignorant kafirs who apologize for Islam.) Since Islam needed the men to work, husbands were left alive. That was the reason that the Koran said that in this case, even with the husbands looking on, it was good to rape the women.
    Sexual slavery was not only fun and profitable for the Muslim men, but rape was a powerful tactic of war, then and today. The women are forced into submission to Muslim men and the husbands are humiliated. Humiliated men are weakened men, so more kafirs were less able to resist Islam.
    For some time Mohammed’s favorite sex partner was a Christian slave from Egypt named Mary. One of Mohammed’s wives caught him in some state of intimacy with Mary in the wife’s bedroom and raised hell. Mohammed promised to not do it again and moved Mary to her own apartment in Medina.
    Mohammed had received Mary and her sister as gifts. He gave her sister away to a Muslim poet. He was used to giving away sex slaves. He gave several of his top lieutenants kafir sex slaves. Umar, who later became caliph, gave his sex slave to his son. [As an aside, when he was caliph, his son got drunk and Umar beat him to death.]
    FP: This institution of Islamic sexual slavery isn’t just a reality of the past is it?
    Warner: Everything that has been said up to now is not only history; it is Sunna (the example of the perfect pattern of action and morality found in Mohammed). So today we don’t have a beautiful blonde Christian girl on the block in Mecca, but we have continuous and ongoing rapes by Muslims in kafir cities. This goes on everywhere that Islam goes because it is Sunna.
    This is a continuous 1400-year history of jihad. In every detailed history that comes from the original documents from history, rape is a constant. You have to look in the original documents, since our historians refuse to report it in so-called history books.
    Rape is Sunna. Rape is not a sin. Rape is permitted and encouraged by Mohammed and the Koran. Islam is the only political system in the world that includes rules for rape and war. Rape is jihad. How good can it get? A Muslim gets to rape a kafir girl and get heaven credits. All jihad is a ticket to Paradise.
    The most disgusting aspect of the Islamic rape of kafirs is not the rapes, but the kafir response. Kafirs become dhimmis by ignoring the rapes. I challenge you to find one, even one, mention of Islamic rape in the history books.
    Islamic rape is more taboo than the N-word in the media. At least the N-word is acknowledged to exist. Even unicorns exist in media fantasy. But Islamic rape is forbidden to even exist as a fantasy.
    And to reach a fevered rant: our so-called “feminist” scholars are absolutely intellectually and morally bankrupt hypocrites. They are traitors to our culture and a shame and a disgrace. They remain silent in the face of heinous crimes against women. They are arch-dhimmis when they refuse to speak of the Sunna, history and current rapes of our daughters, mothers, and sisters.
    And our tax dollars support their evil in our public universities.
    FP: Mohammed was a white man and had black slaves, correct? Isn’t there a racism here? Where is all the leftist indignation against Islam on this issue?
    Warner: The relationship between blacks and slavery is ironic. A standard approach of Islam to blacks is that Christianity is the religion of the white man and Islam is the natural religion of the black man. They add that Mohammed’s second convert was a black slave, Bilal, who was Mohammed’s companion and the first muezzin (the man who calls to prayer).
    The Hadith, however, goes out of its way, many times, to tell the world that Mohammed was a white man. The Hadith also tells us the race of the kafirs that Mohammed enslaved. And Mohammed had many black slaves in his household. One of his slaves was a black man called, Anjasha.
    Mohammed owned black slaves. It is that simple. His favorite wife, the child Aisha, had a black slave. But to be fair to Mohammed, he was not a racist about slavery. He enslaved Arabs, Africans, and Greeks. Islam enslaves all kafirs, independent of race.
    Mohammed was politically incorrect about blacks and called them “raisin heads” in the Hadith. Thus it would be a compliment to call a black Muslim a “raisin head.” It would be Sunna and not offensive. Mohammed also said that Muslims are to obey the Islamic leader, “even if they were black.” A left-handed compliment, at best.
    Mohammed used his robe to shield Aisha, so she could watch black slaves perform a martial arts routine in the mosque. The Hadith tells of a prophecy about a black man bringing evil to Islam. Black men were prophesized to destroy the Kabah.
    But when Muslims preach to blacks they only say that Islam’s first muezzin was a black man. They don’t tell the rest of the story.
    FP: Can you give us a brief synopsis of the history of Islamic slavery?
    Warner: It all started with Mohammed and then went worldwide.
    When Islam burst out of Arabia into the kafir world, they took the wealth and slaves. Slavery was an unapologetic part of jihad.
    The Arabic language is a good place to see how important slavery was. In The Submission of Women and Slaves, we collected over 30 Arabic words that deal with slavery. We think that Arabic has more words for slaves than any other language.
    Both a black African and a black slave have the same name, abd. The historical reason for this is that African slavery was so important to Islamic economics. Language reflects history. Islamic legal history is filled with the complaints by African Muslim jurists about how Arabic Muslim slave traders captured African Muslims and sold them on the auction block.
    History records around 11,000,000 Africans being sent to the Americas and about 13,000,000 being sent to Islamic countries for a total of 24,000,000 African slaves. To get one slave, many others have to be killed for the tribe to surrender to enslavement. The old, sick and children are left behind to starve. These collateral deaths are conservatively estimated to about 5 to 1. So that implies that over 1400 years, 120,000,000 million Africans have been killed to furnish Islam with its profits.
    The accepted history of race in the U.S. is that white men captured Africans, brought them to the U.S. and sold them as slaves. This is wrong. When the white slavers showed up on the west coast of Africa, they didn’t capture Africans. They looked them over in the pens, gave the Muslim slave traders their money, took their bills of sale, and loaded their purchases into their boats.
    The Muslims had been plying the trade of war, capture, enslavement, and sale for a thousand years. Mohammed was a slave trader. Long after the white slave traders quit, the Muslims continued their African slave trade. It still exists today.
    And to put a fine point on it, many African slaves were castrated by removing both testicles and penis. Castrated slaves brought more on the slave block. Castrated blacks were the traditional keepers of Mohammed’s mosque in Medina.
    African slaves were called abd; white slaves were called mamluk. Most black slaves were used in mining and heavy fieldwork. White slaves were used more for skilled trades. White slaves were even promoted to leadership positions, if they converted. Only one black slave was promoted to leadership. He ruled Egypt and was a eunuch.
    Over a million white slaves were taken from Europe. Our word, slave, comes from Slav. A white woman was the highest price slave for 1400 years on the Meccan auction block. The Muslim who could not afford a white sex slave choose an Ethiopian woman at a third of the price.
    The most revolting enslavement of whites was how Turkish Muslims took as a tax, one out of five Christian children in Islamic ruled Eastern Europe. These male children were taken back to Turkey where they became the janissaries, elite soldiers for the sultan. The Turkish sultans did not trust tribal Muslims to be the elite palace guards, since they all harbored ancient tribal rivalries. We see the same distrust of Muslim tribal politics in Afghanistan, where kafirs are used as presidential guards.
    The Hindus were enslaved, but we don’t have the number. We do know that jihad took half of ancient Hindustan and killed 80,000,000 Hindus. We have accountings of Hindus being enslaved by the hundreds of thousands at a time.
    Muslims enslave everyone, but no one enslaves Muslims. This knowledge is part of Islam’s arrogance and superiority. They know the history; it is the dhimmis (kafir apologists) who are ignorant of the doctrine and history of Islamic slavery.
    FP: The violent capture and enslavement of black Africans by Muslim Arabs continues to this today. The root of this modern-day slavery is, of course, Islamic doctrine.
    Warner: The enslavement of Africans is happening today. The only reason that Islam stopped enslaving whites and Hindus is that Islam is too weak to resist the social pressure. The Sunna of slavery has not changed, just the ability to use their law.
    In the African countryside Muslims are still using jihad to enrich themselves. I have spoken with a Sudanese slave who escaped. The Muslims killed his parents and took him and his sister. Each night the jihadists gang raped his sister. Remember, rape is Sunna.
    When he met his new masters, they put him in the middle of a circle of the family and each beat him with a stick. He was told that his new name was Abd, black slave. He slept in the barn with the animals.
    Our media and intellectuals are quick to punish the slightest insult by a white against a black man, but they have not the slightest recognition of murder, rape and enslavement of blacks by Islam. Our media and intellectuals are dhimmis.
    FP: Final thoughts and comments?
    Warner: Slavery is the fruit of Islamic duality. Mohammed, the master of dualism and submission, used slavery as a tool of jihad because it worked. Mohammed’s life was infused with slavery. Slaves were the lifeblood of Islam. Mohammed, the white man, owned both male and female black slaves. His attitude was pure dualism.
    The most disgusting thing about Islamic slavery is not that Muslims enslave others, but that we ignore it. The Muslims have been fed the Koran and the Sunna in their mother’s milk. They are doing what is ethical according to Islam. In a strange way, Muslims are to be pitied. A Muslim is the first victim of Islam.
    The criticism of whites because of their being involved in slavery is standard fair in the media and the universities. Try to find a university that even teaches about the killing of 120,000,000 Africans for Muslims to profit from the 24,000,000 slaves.
    Blacks define themselves on the basis of slavery. They will not go beyond the white, Christian version of slavery. There is only one theory of history in the black community — the West African Limited Edition version of history. Blacks will not admit the broad scope of slave history. Hindu slavery? It never happened. White and European slavery? It never happened. Slavery on the East coast of Africa? It never happened. A massive slave trade through the Sahara into North Africa? It never happened. Black, eunuchs at the Medina mosque? It never happened. This incomplete history of slavery is what the taxpayers fund in the state universities.
    How can black leaders ignore Islam’s sacred violence in Africa? Why aren’t the black columnists, writers, professors, or ministers speaking out? They are ignorant and in total denial. They are the molested children of Islam.
    Blacks are dhimmis and serve Islam with their silence. There is a deep fear of Islam that makes them overlook and placate Islam. Arabs are the masters of blacks.
    One thing whites and blacks have in common is that their ancestors were enslaved by Islam, and both are too ignorant to know it. Blacks and whites have a secret shame buried under the denial of being slaves inside Islam.
    But the rest of the media and intellectuals line up as dhimmis, too. One of the marks of a dhimmi under the fourth caliph, Umar, was that a dhimmi was forbidden to study the Koran. The chief mark of dhimmitude today is ignorance of the Koran, the Sira and the Hadith. The ignorance of kafir intellectuals about Islam is profound.
    They don’t know about how jihad killed the 120,000,000 Africans, the 60,000,000 Christians, the 80,000,000 Hindus or the 10,000,000 Buddhists. Our intellectuals do not know about the Tears of Jihad (detailed in all of our books). That is a lot of death and ignorance — 270,000,000 dead. Our intellectuals don’t know, don’t care and don’t bother. They deny.
    University Islamic studies never mention the Islamic political doctrine. The media discusses Islam in terms of political correctness, and multiculturalism. History courses don’t teach about the civilizational annihilation due to jihad. Religious leaders placate imams in public gatherings and have no knowledge what the imam actually thinks of them. Political thinkers do not even know Islam as a political force
    The problem with this ignorance is that our intellectuals are unable to help us. They do not understand that Islam is a civilization based upon the ideal of dualism. Islamic ethics and politics have one set of rules for Muslims and another for kafirs. Our civilization is based upon the ideal of unitary ethics, the Golden Rule. We do not have two sets of laws and ethics, like Islam. Our intellectuals cannot explain what dualism has meant in the past or what it will mean for our future — civilizational annihilation.
    Our intellectuals and the media have only one view of Islam — a glorious civilization. They have created the “terrorist”, a bogus term based upon ignorance. And the “terrorist” is not even a “real” Muslim, but an extremist fundamentalist. All of these terms are based upon a profound ignorance of Islamic political doctrine.
    Intellectuals cannot connect the dots of persecution of other intellectuals and artists today, such as Salman Rushdie, Theo van Gogh, the Mohammed cartoon riots, and Daniel Pearl. Their persecution is part of a 1400 year Islamic tradition of keeping all intellectuals and artists in line with the doctrine of political Islam. But for our intellectuals, there is no history, no connection, no pattern, no doctrine of Islam. Their only doctrine is the doctrine of denial. These intellectuals write our textbooks. Then our tax dollars buy the books to feed the ignorance.
    What explains the intellectuals’ silence and ignorance? The enormous violence of jihad has produced the psychology of the “molested child” syndrome. Intellectuals fear, apologize for, and placate the Islamic abusers, ignoring the violence of the past. Then they turn around and advise our politicians. The result is an ignorant populace who look to our intellectuals for guidance and find treachery and lies.
    FP: Bill Warner, thank you for joining us.
    Warner: Thank you for standing against political Islam.

  3. i’m not surprised at all and could never understand why black americans embrace islam,especially black women ? obviously they didn’t do their homework.islam by its very book condones is unchangeable and perfect in everyway and all must emulate mohamed who owned ,sold and.captured slaves.slavery is stain upon humanity. but it still thrives in muslim held territories of sudan,mauritania and muslims were often forced into slavery by their.light skinned arab masters. un like slavery in america,which was unjustifiable there is a difference. a traceable history of families with records that in lots of cases go back hundreds of years. family trees that date back to our earliest known records and our penchant for keeping archives of the slave trade. you will find no history of families in islamic slavery. this is due to the fact that the men were killed when captured ,boys castrated women and girls sold into sexual slavery and made into concubines and were absorbed into islam.there were records kept,no letters sent to concerned relatives.
    there will never be an islamic abolitionist movement. that would contradict the teachings of mohamed the slave owner/ trader.

  4. What about the Moors, and also, Mansa Musa and the Empire of Mali? One was one of the most brilliant empires of recorded history, reining over Europe for 8 centuries, while the other was the richest man in documented history. Whom, on his pilgrimage to Mecca, gave away so much gold and built so many temples that it ruined the gold economy in Egypt for a decade, and this is with him refilling the coffers before departing. Both were Islamic, neither were slaves.

  5. Also, I’m still waiting for someone to refute the first post of this comment section with sourced material of their own. Would go a long way in helping those doing research.

    • historical events does not change he fact that islam is a racist arab supremacist religion. they started enslaving black africans before the europeans did. when the moors invaded europe they enslaved many europeans and along the coasts they were frequent slave raids where they kidnapped and enslaved many. during the crimean khanate period there were frequent slave raids hundreds of Slavic Europeans where enslaved.

  6. Arabs of the present era are mulattoes of Persians, who had occupied Arabia and Yemen in 5th and 7th centuries, and Ottoman Turks who ruled the region since the 12th century. Turks stayed in Arabia until the 20th century, when the Al-Saud family struck a deal with the British to throw them out.

    Abyssinians had occupied Arabia twice in the 4th and 6th centuries. Mohammed was born the year Abyssinians reinvaded Arabia with their elephant battalions. The Islamic calendar begins from the “Year of the Elephants”. Pre-Islamic Arabia was much similar to their cousins across the Red Sea, the Abyssinians.

    All this revisionism about Arabs being white is just that, revisionism. It does not stand to the known history.

  7. One must also not that in Arabic as well as several languages of the language family in which Arabic is classified the word white comes from a root which also signifies “pure,” “clean,” “free,” “without impurity,” “without blemish,” etc… It is not about color, however. “White” is known as a colorless condition, without dye or taint of any sort. When the Prophet was described as white, that was the sense of it. Skin that has no freckles, acne, etc… is described as such. It has no relationship to the race-charged mind set of recent ages. so one gets the whole picture, the expressions are conventions in languages spoken by black and brown peoples, for instance.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.