Ramadan Day 28 thought for the day from my new book The History of Jihad: by the end of 1625, the English had lost a thousand ships to jihadi pirates, and the warriors of jihad from Morocco had gained a thousand English slaves. One of these slaves, Robert Adams, who was ransomed and returned to England, recounted that as a slave in Morocco he had been given only “a littell coarse bread and water,” and lived in “a dungion under ground, wher some 150 or 200 of us lay, altogether, having no comforte of the light, but a littell hole.” Adams recounted that he was “every day beaten to make me turn Turk,” that is, convert to Islam.
Click here to preorder The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS, the only comprehensive one-volume history of jihad in the English language, including not just the jihad in Europe but in India, Africa and elsewhere, drawing primarily on accounts of eyewitnesses and contemporary chroniclers. Arm yourself with the truth against the prevailing disinformation. Preorder here now.
Guilherme de Vizcaya y Castañeda! says
Cant wait for the book to ship
eur says
You must read what this woman writes, Zineb the Rhazoui.
Among other things she writes about Ramadan in the countries of the Maghreb and Egypt… incredible the bigotry of the Muslims and the authorities (not only of the authorities as the Muslims say, they always complain that it is the politicians who make the laws… is a lie).
They arrest those who do not fast in Ramadan, in Egypt the few fast food establishments, run by Muslims, serve their clientele Coptic and tourists… with chants of the Quran, especially those verses that speak about Christians.
In Algeria, the unrecognized Christian minority must also comply with the Koranic impositions. It’s amazing what these societies… and they talk about peace and tolerance… they are fascists… all Muslims, all of them.
gravenimage says
Zineb el Rhazoui is a survivor of the Charlie Hebdo massacre.
roberta says
As always, thanks to Robert Spencer for keeping us all up to speed on current and historical facts about Islam.
Now the side note: Belize, a country that was once a part of the British Empire still refer to moslims as ”Turks”. Believe me, for a country so small Belize has its fair share of ”Turks”. But dont worry yourself, the turks wont travel up the Yucatan Peninsula into Mexico and then to Texas.
Nour says
The Qur’an explicitly states, ‘There shall be no compulsion in religion.” And the Prophet (peace be upon him) has been repeatedly told in the Qur’an that his task is simply to deliver the message and not to force it down their throats: “Let those who choose to believe, believe; and let those who choose disbelieve, disbelieve.” There are virtually dozens of verses in the Qur’an reiterating this point. So, Islam does not allow any Muslim to use force to convert another human being. In order for the conversion to be valid, it has to be based on one’s own free volition and choice.
All of the objective historians, including the orientalist scholars of missionary background, to the best of my knowledge acknowledge the fact that Islam was spread mostly through peaceful means. This is the conclusion of the eminent orientalist Thomas Arnold in his work entitled Preaching of Islam. Mind you he was not a Muslim but a Christian missionary working in India who was interested to explore this issue for his own benefit. He argues this point quite well in his book. He also concludes that conversion to Islam was a slow process.
jayell says
“The Qur’an explicitly states, ‘There shall be no compulsion in religion.” And the Prophet (peace be upon him) has been repeatedly told in the Qur’an that his task is simply to deliver the message and not to force it down their throats”………
Really? How about this reliable information, courtesy of another knowledgeable website:-
1. Allah’s Apostle (Muhammad) said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally.” Bukhari 8:387
2. Even within the same sura (chapter) of the Quran that verse 256 appears, Muslims are instructed to “fight with them (non-Muslims) until there is no more persecution and religion is only for Allah. (v. 2:193)” Apologists claim that this applied to the people of Mecca. This is interesting because these same Meccans were later converted to Islam by force (compulsion).
3. Muhammed’s early conciliatory attitudes (hen he had noa army) changed dramatically after he attained the power to conquer, which he eventually used with impunity to bring other tribes into the Muslim fold. Contrast verse 2:256 with Suras 9 and 5, which were the last “revealed,” and it is easy to see why Islam has been anything but a religion of peace from the time of Muhammad to the present day.
Though most Muslims today reject the practice of outright forcing others into changing their religion, forced conversion has been a part of Islamic history since Muhammad first picked up a sword. As he is recorded in many places as saying, “I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah…” (See Bukhari 1.2.24)
4. When Mohammed marched into Mecca with an army, one of his very first tasks was to destroy idols at the Kaaba, which had been devoutly worshipped by the Arabs for centuries. By eliminating these objects of worship, he destroyed the religion of the people and supplanted it with his own. Those who would not convert were killed or evicted. Later, he ordered that Jews and Christians be expelled from Arabia. Does forcing others to choose between their homes or their faith sound like “no compulsion in religion?”
5. According to Muslim historians, Muhammad eventually ordered people to attend prayers at the mosque to the point of burning alive those who failed to comply. He also ordered that children who reached a certain age be beaten if they refused to pray.
6. Even the same contemporary Muslims who quote 2:256 usually believe in Islamic teachings that sound very much like religious compulsion. These would be the laws punishing apostasy by death (or imprisonment, for females), and the institutionalized discrimination against religious minorities under Islamic rule that is sometimes referred to as “dhimmiitude.”
7. Islamic law explicitly prohibits non-Muslims from sharing their faith and even includes the extortion of money from them in the form of a tax called the jizya. Those who refuse to pay this arbitrary amount are put to death. If this isn’t compulsion, then what is?
b.a. freeman says
*very* well put, jayell! thank U for the explicit bukhari references.
Buraq says
@ Nour
You really are a 5-star clown! OK, I’ll take the bait. Let’s see if you can get out of this one, Houdini.
Allah says there is no compulsion in religion, you claim. But in a reliable (Sahih) hadith, your prophet is asked what should happen if anyone leaves Islam. “Kill him!” retorts the desert bandit turned prophet.
So, clearly, Allah and His chosen messenger are at odds with each other. Allah and Mohamed do not agree on this point. Can you explain this obvious, significant difference of views?
(I’ll leave it to you to explain abrogation, ya clown!)
b.a. freeman says
are U *serious*?!!???
obviously, either U have never read the quran, the kutub alsittah, or the sira, and are completely unaware of the concept of abrogation (see quran 2:106), not to mention sharia (see “umdat al-salik,” among other highly-reputable manuals of sharia), or U are practicing taqiyyah. only a new musliim or a liar would quote somebody who was *that* unaware of islam and the initial reports of the slaughters perpetrated on the lands invaded by the first muslims.
nevertheless, as a born-again christian, i am commanded by Jesus to love U, and i do. U have been deluded by a 7th-century psychopathic narcissist named muhammed, to whom some refer as “prophet,” and to whom i refer as “profit,” because with all his slave-taking, raping, murdering, and theft, he was *obviously* in the religion biz for the money (his cut of all the raids was 20%, remember?). if U continue to follow this poor creature with his hideous moral defects, U will go to the same eternal death to which he has gone. *please* think about Jesus and the possibilities of a life lived with love, rather than hate and mass murder.
HugoHackenbush says
See Ibn Ishaq’s biography of Mr. Muhammad (Guillaume translation): Page 165: Regarding Sura 109. One of the “Satanic” verses (meaning put into the mind of Muhammad by Satan. Yes you read that right, by Satan). Interestingly Sura 109 is one of the verses frequently quoted to show the “tolerance” of Islam “…You can have your religion, all of it, and I have mine”. Later Mr. Muhammad is chastised by Allah (via Gabriel) for saying this (page 166) and Muhammad is remorseful. Allah then “sends down” a rewrite of Sura 109 via Sura 22.51 which then abrogates the original and acknowledges that this Sura is an undoing of the influence of Satan.
aguysomewhere says
Nour your false prophet was a slave master, murderer mass murderer and genocidist, a man not worthy of adoration or respect. A truly detestable man.
gravenimage says
The appalling Nour wrote:
The Qur’an explicitly states, ‘There shall be no compulsion in religion.”
…………………………
Sure…this means that the victims have the right to suffer slavery or death if they don’t want to convert to Islam. It is just that Islam does not consider this “compulsion”. *Ugh*.
More:
And the Prophet (peace be upon him) has been repeatedly told in the Qur’an that his task is simply to deliver the message and not to force it down their throats: “Let those who choose to believe, believe; and let those who choose disbelieve, disbelieve.” There are virtually dozens of verses in the Qur’an reiterating this point. So, Islam does not allow any Muslim to use force to convert another human being. In order for the conversion to be valid, it has to be based on one’s own free volition and choice.
…………………………
The only importance about volition is that Islam holds that those who convert out of fear at sword point who are not enthusiastic about the vicious creed of Islam go to hell. This has nothing to do with Muslims not violently converting their victims.
More:
All of the objective historians, including the orientalist scholars of missionary background, to the best of my knowledge acknowledge the fact that Islam was spread mostly through peaceful means.
…………………………
What utter crap. The Islamic texts themselves brag that “paradise is under the shade of swords”.
More:
This is the conclusion of the eminent orientalist Thomas Arnold in his work entitled Preaching of Islam. Mind you he was not a Muslim but a Christian missionary working in India who was interested to explore this issue for his own benefit. He argues this point quite well in his book. He also concludes that conversion to Islam was a slow process.
…………………………
Actually, Arnold writes quite extensively about Muslim conquest–just noting that Islam often used its victims for extracting Jizya, rather than converting them.
Nour might just as well argue that Islam is peaceful because not all victims they pirated were compelled to convert to Islam–many were just enslaved and used for their labor or as sex slaves.
Now let Nour tell us why we should consider this a good thing?
Notice she has not a word of criticism for her coreligionists pirating our ships and enslaving their crews. But then, why would she?
mortimer says
Nour, you are deceitful about K. 2:256. It actually means there is ‘no compulsion’ to stay OUT OF ISLAM. Yes, Nour, you Taqiyya-monger, thanks to your arrogance, I WILL NOW EXPOSE YOUR DECEIT and your bold TAQIYYA.
YOU, Nour, and I know the REAL CONTEXT of the ‘NO COMPULSION’ verse 2:256 … and… it actually means THE REVERSE of what you deceitfully claim. Of course, all Muslims are COMPELLED to REMAIN in Islam.
Let’s examine the vocabulary … the word “l-dini” refers to Islam … the DEEN or the LEGAL SYSTEM or the UNIVERSAL WORLD DOMINANCE of ISLAM. Other religions are NOT a UNIVERSAL WORLD CONQUEST and DOMINANCE SYSTEM.
The real message of 2:256 is that “Nothing should keep anyone from ENTERING Islam” … However, the APOSTASY PUNISHMENT of DEATH for apostasy will COMPEL Muslims to REMAIN in Islam. Will it not, O Deceitful One? (Your Taqiyyah is now exposed.)
Here is the hadithic EXPLANATION of K.2:256 :
When the children of a woman (in pre-Islamic days) did not survive, she took a vow on herself that if her child survives, she would convert it to a Jew. When Banu an-Nadir were expelled (from Arabia), there were some children of the Ansar (helpers) among them. They said: We shall not leave our children. So Allah the Exalted revealed; “Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error.” (SAD 14:256)
It is reported here that Muhammad revealed this verse to counter the conversion of children to Judaism. In those times, when there was no formalised religion among some of the tribes of Arabia, should a contagious illnesses strike, the women would pray that if their children survived such epidemics they would convert them to Judaism. Also, when Muhammad arrived in Medina, many of the new converts were concerned about the religion of their children as in that time they respected the right for an individual to choose their religion.
To this end Muhammad revealed the verse giving Allah’s guidance that people were not compelled to convert their children to Judaism should they survive an illness, nor are their children compelled to stay in their pagan belief because they were born in it.
This no compulsion in religion is strictly a one way affair. You are not compelled to stay in any non-Islamic religion, hence allowing the conversion to Islam. However, once you are a Muslim, you are compelled to remain in Islam.
At this time, Muhammad was still relatively weak in numbers and power. He could not use force to bring non-believers to Islam. This verse sought to give God’s sanction that it was acceptable to leave a religion and come to Islam, ‘the right direction’ as he puts it. However not too long after this we find Muhammad as a warlord commanding armies that would bring terror to those who did not accept his message.
This is evident from reading the Qur’an as a complete doctrine where Muhammad plainly declares, ‘kill the unbelievers wherever you find them’, ‘Fight against those who believe not in Allah until they pay the Jizya with willing submission’, and ‘fight them until disbelief is no more, and religion is for Allah.’
Or if we read from the Hadiths, we find Muhammad declaring: “I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, none has the right to be worshipped but Allah”, “Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him.”
In Islamic nations, it is a criminal offence for a Muslim to convert to another religion. If Islamic countries understood ‘no compulsion in religion’ to mean that a person had the right to adopt the religion of his/her choice, then Sharia laws preventing apostasy would not exist.
Nour, you have just lost your contention. ALL MUSLIMS ARE COMPELLED TO REMAIN IN ISLAM or be MURDERED by other Muslims.
gravenimage says
Good post.
kuriakose says
Good one, Mortimer.
Carol the 1st says
Love the important extra detail, Mortimer, and “Dominance System” seems more quickly descriptive in everyday discussions than “Political System.
mortimer says
Nour, let us close one more whole in your deceitful argument by REVEALING the MOHAMMED used COMPULSION to force people to join Islam:
[Muhammad] said: “Woe to you Abu Sufyan, isn’t it time that you recognize that I am God’s apostle?” [Sufyan] answered, “As to that I still have some doubt.” [Ibn Abbas] said to [Sufyan], “Submit and testify that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is the apostle of God before you lose your head,” so [Sufyan] did so.” – Tabari pt2,pg157; Ibn Kathir ‘Biography of the Prophet’ pt3,pg549
Tabari, Hisham & Ibn Kathir quote the same story of Muhammad, about to attack Mecca, when his men arrest a Meccan leader Abu Sufyan, and bring him to Muhammad. Muhammad tells him:
‘Woe to you O Abu Sufyan. Is it not time for you to realize that there is no God but the only God?” Abu Sufyan answers “I do believe that.” Muhammad then says “Woe to you Abu Sufyan, is it not time for you to know that I am the Apostle of God?” Abu Sufyan answers “By God, O Muhammad, of this there is doubt in my soul.”
(Tabari pt2,pg157; Ibn Kathir ‘Biography of the Prophet’ pt3,pg549)
Mohammed forcibly converted people in the hadiths, therefore forcible conversion is Sunna and normative Islam, rather than an aberration.
PAKISTAN PERMITS FORCIBLE CONVERSION TO ISLAM
Here is the important point: “In November 2015, the Pakistani Ministry of Religious Affairs and the Council of Islamic Ideology opposed a law on “forced conversion”, sparking dismay and protests among Pakistani Hindus and Christians.”
No less than the ‘Pakistani Ministry of Religious Affairs and the Council of Islamic Ideology’ refused to protect vulnerable Hindus and Christians from forcible conversion.
This GOVERNMENTAL APPROVAL OF FORCIBLE CONVERSION…thus puts the lie to the claim that Islam does not allow forcible conversion.
So, Nour, don’t try that trick again. YOU ARE EXPOSED.
gravenimage says
Excellent points.
Neil says
Below is Mohammed’s covenant to the Christians of Mount Sinia, Egypt:
“This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate. No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.. No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day”
b.a. freeman says
and how often has that “covenant” been applied, Neil? how much to U know about islam? how much of its history do U know? have U read any of its scriptures (which are *more* than just the quran)? are U aware of the concept of abrogation? do U know what the penalty for apostasy from islam is? do U know what taqiyyah is? do U know what the “sirat rasul allah” or “umdat al-salik” are?
i encourage U to learn more about islam *for* *yourself*. don’t take my word for it, and don’t take *any* imam’s word for it. there are english translations (and other languages besides english) of islamic scripture. U don’t need to read a whole lot to get a good general understanding of the scriptures, and it is well worth your time to do so. if i am a knuckle-dragging right-wing extremist, then does not good citizenship *require* U to learn more about islam simply to refute my stupid arguments? isn’t truth the best argument, and isn’t a first-hand knowledge of the truth better than parroting other’s words?
gravenimage says
“Neil” wrote:
Below is Mohammed’s covenant to the Christians of Mount Sinia (sic), Egypt…
………………………..
It figures that the dishonest “Neil” would cite the ‘Covenant of St. Catherine’s’–also know as the “Ashtiname”.
This is, of course, a well-known forgery by the monks of the monastery itself. This is obvious–Muhammed, supposing he existed at all, did not live to see the Muslim conquest of Egypt.
This forgery, of course, was drawn up by desperate monks hoping that they could save themselves and their parishioners from Muslim depredations.
Robert Spencer covers this, here:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/01/robert-spencer-in-pj-lifestyle-the-hypocrisy-of-the-huffington-posts-praise-of-muhammad
The European says
In his book “The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World” Dr. John Andrew Morrow mentions the “Covenant with the Monks of Mt.Sinai”, too.
According to him this covenant was written by Muhammad in 623 AD, one year after the hijra, but Mount Sinai and the monastery of St.Catherine weren’t conquered by Muslim armies until 640 AD, several years after Muhammad’s death.
1.How could Muhammad grant protection and priveleges to a group which was not subject to his rule at that time and thus he was not capable of protecting at all?
But there is more!
2. The covenant says that Muhammad did not only grant protection to the monks but that he also exempted them from paying the jizya.
The jizya?
The covenant was written in 623 but in 623 the jizya did not exist. Muhammad had established himself at Yathrib/Medina, he ruled there as a kind of mediator between the different tribes and he set up the “Constitution of Medina,” a set of rules which gave equal rights and duties to Muslims and non-Muslims. The jizya came later; the qur’anic verse (6,29) which mandates the jizya from the non-Muslims was revealed to Mohammad in 630..
So, how could he exempt non-Muslims from that poll tax ( jizya) when the jizya didn’t even exist at that time? It defies the laws of logic, doesn’t it?
Yes, the “Covenant with the monks of Mt.Sinai” was a forgery but a very clever one, since Muslim rulers ( Mamluks as well as Ottomans) must have taken it at face value when they granted rights and privileges to the monastery of St.Catherine.
And even if it is not a forgery, what can be proven by that? That, sometimes, Muhammad could be nice with non-Muslims ? Hitler, Staline and Mao-Tse Dong could also be nice with their enemies if it suited them.
gravenimage says
Exactly, The European.
warren raymond says
That’s a well known forgery.
Walter Sieruk says
That Englishmen who was beaten every day in attempts to force him to “convert” to Islam further shows that Islam has no actual logical, reason based arguments to be is foundation for is claim of “truth” so ,when in power , Muslims feel the need to resort to brute force to gain “converts.”
In addition, all this is a reminder of the wisdom of the Christian man, roger Williams, who was the founder of the State of Rhode Island. For he wrote “That religion cannot be true which need such instruments of violence to uphold it.”
steve says
Jay, so true, Got a book from the early 1900’s . the English adventurer/traveller writer is in Nigeria, He is told of the thousands of years of African slave caravans by Arabs from there to Middle East. What awoke my remembrance of the story was the fact that the endless lines of enchained slaves would be led by BLIND MEN…. and when he enquired as to how anyone could find their way across huge distances of unmarked constantly drifting desert sand he was told that the blind guides were essential because of their enhanced sense of smell. They and only they could follow the trail of bones ..hidden deep under the sand….
mariam rove says
Why do these people travel to those kind of s…holes? Mind boggling! m
gravenimage says
He didn’t, mariam. This man was travelling in a ship that was piracted by Muslims.
gravenimage says
Englishman enslaved in Morocco was “every day beaten” to compel him to convert to Islam
………………………….
So much for Muslims who claim that in Islam slaves are treated like brothers.
In fact, there are many horrifying stories like this one.
gravenimage says
Grimly true, Jay Boo.
Andy says
https://www.infowars.com/tommy-robinson-shipped-to-high-security-muslim-prison-to-be-released-to-general-population/?utm_source=Nightly+Newsletter&utm_campaign=08b90b3bdf-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_06_13_09_09&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e12661a83c-08b90b3bdf-37893017
Caolan Robertson Delivers Latest Tommy Robinson Update
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBUnVtOoxxs
Andy says
Emergency: Tommy Robinson Transferred to Muslim Prison, Facing Certain Death
Muslim inmates already chanting death threats against Robinson
Carol the 1st says
This video looks like one we’ll want to watch:
Tommy Robinson (Counter-Jihad Leaders Speak Out!)-LIVE Robert Spencer, David Wood, Whaddo You Meme??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxjlwZ-ru8M
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
“Dutch ‘burqa ban’ proposal nears final vote before expected adoption into law”
https://www.rt.com/news/429657-netherlands-burka-ban-final-vote/
Lydia Church says
Their koran mandates murder for those who don’t convert and who leave islam, and we see that acted out every day. Robert provides the verses almost every day so I won’t bother repeating them.
It is absurd to deny this fact, as some on here do.
In fact, many comments are getting more idiotic all the time around here and it’s starting to get just plain annoying.
Debi Brand says
“Englishman enslaved in Morocco was “every day beaten” to compel him to convert to Islam”
As have countless done since the advent of Islam–countless finding Islam, simply irresistible…
“Believers,” simply following the way of their “beloved Prophet.”
duh swami says
“The Quran is a dark and evil fairy tale, whispered into the ear of a semi-psychotic Arab, by an incoherent angel named Gabriel’…
Both Allah and Gabriel are not human,,,They are a combination of space aliens and human opinion based on fear….
It is insulting to humanity to let space aliens dictate your thoughts and behavior…
Don’t forget the alien book, ‘How to serve man’, was a cook book…
J D S says
This was happening in the 1600’s and before ……Muslims don’t have the huge military armies of that era but their mind set Is the same and they do have armies as such……migrants, professors, teachers, school administrators, lone wolves and on and on it goes….
AND THE WORLD STSNDS STILL!
Lebel says
The disgusting Muslim converts at wikipedia are dubious about this account.
“Robert Adams (born c. 1790) was a twenty-five-old American sailor who claimed to be enslaved in North Africa for three years, from 1810 to 1814. During this time he claimed to have visited Timbuktu, which would have made him the first Westerner to reach the city, though his narrative is dubious. Upon his stated liberation, and return to Europe, Adams’ story was published in two heavily edited and divergent accounts, most notably The Narrative of Robert Adams in 1816.
Because his story was sanctioned by some of the most distinguished men in England, including members of government, who had a noted financial interest in Africa, his narrative(s) gained credibility despite “its most glaring absurdities.”[1]
Widely cited as an example of white slavery, and having inspired Robinson Crusoe today both accounts are widely known to have been fabrications, lending to the dismissal of Adam’s story within general history discussions and recordings.[1][2]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Adams_(sailor)
One day, I would like to sit down with Robert Spencer and ask him : “you had ISIS, why make shit up?”
Buraq says
@ Lebel
You’re a clown, Lebel! The reason why the Robert Adams story might have question marks against it is nothing to do with Robert Adams. His story was written down by two different authors who had their own agenda – one had ambition, the other wanted to make a lot of money from publishing the story. The so-called discrepancies you allege have nothing to do with Adams saying different things at different times.
In fact, both editors of his story agreed that Adams was an ‘artless’ narrator who spoke “with utmost simplicity” in a language which had the “internal marks of truth”. He resisted the “temptation of exciting the wonder of the credulous, or the sympathy of the compassionate, by filling his story with miraculous adventures, or overcharged pictures of suffering”. Adams “is subordinate to the circumstances of his story, rather than himself the prominent feature of it; and almost every part of his Narrative is strictly in nature, and unpretending”: he is “too ignorant to invent himself”.
So, too simple to make it up! And furthermore, Lebel, there were tons of true stories of capture by Barbary pirates between the 16th and early 19th Century. And although the people telling their stories lived hundreds of years apart and never met, the content was often the same: brutality at the hands of their Muslim captors, and attempts at forced conversion.
When, oh when, are you going to give that brutal creed you defend? You’ve chosen the savage over the civilized man!
gravenimage says
“You had ISIS”? Is the foul Lebel claiming that Robert Spencer’s opposing the savagery of ISIS somehow means that he likes them? What sort of crap is this?
The European says
What is your point, Lebel? Do you want to tell us that thousands and thousands of white people had not been enslaved by Muslim slave traders and slave holders from North Africa? Do you want this to be debunked as a myth, a fabrication?
Sorry, but you are reasoning like some Holocaust-deniers. They, too, go through the narratives of Holocaust survivors, and, spotting inaccuracies, embellishments and inconsistencies here and there,, they conclude from it that the whole thing must be a hoax. But, it isn’t true, the Holocaust happened, as much as the Muslim slave trade did happen and white slavery was real; there is no point in denying historical facts which are corroborated by overwhelming evidence.
Read a good book, for starters. Robert C.Davis wrote an excellent study on Muslim slave trade in the coastal areas of North Africa, and his estimation that over one million whites had been enslaved by Muslims is very plausible ( Christian Slaves, Muslim Master – White slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, written by Robert C. Davis)
Lebel says
“What is your point, Lebel? Do you want to tell us that thousands and thousands of white people had not been enslaved by Muslim slave traders and slave holders from North Africa? Do you want this to be debunked as a myth, a fabrication?”
Slavery is a fact. Slavery in Islamic empires a fact. Far-fetched stories can however be questioned. We cannot assume that it’s true because Islam is evil and so any story that confirms that belief must be true. This is the jihadwatch way but we can do better.
The European says
Okay, stories about Islam must be subject to scrutiny. We cannot believe any narrative confirming Islam is evil because we think it is, We must establish its authenticity and accuracy,or -at least its plausibility- by examining the historical context and other, similar narratives. If we don’t do this, defenders of Islam can easily dismiss our criticism of Islam as anti-Islamic hate speech, saying we are taking fiction for facts and criticize Islam because our view of Islam is conditioned by islamophobic bias.
So, let’s talk a little bit about slavery. What do you think? Is slavery a good thing or is it a bad thing? Should it be abolished anywhere, anytime and by all means or could it be tolerated -under certain circumstances?
Western civilisation put a lot of pressure on Islamic countries to abolish slavery; and Saudi-Arabia has been the last one which did it in the sixties? All Islamic countries? Really?
Sudan, for example, which became an Islamic state with sharia law in 1983 still practices Islamnic slavery. Slavery is also practised in Mauretania, another Islamic country where Arab-Mauretanians hold an estimated half million slaves, and even in Syria, cases of Islamic slavery have been signalled ( and I am not talking about ISIS) Officially abolished, Islamic slavery is practised in some Islamic countries where sharia law reigns supreme. And, what is more impotant, slavery in Islam is in conformity with sharia law, nowhere does sharia law probibit the practice of slavery. So, if sharia law which is an important part of Islamic doctrine does not condemn and prohibit slavery and if Muslims continue to see Muhammad who was a slave master as their role model, there must be a lot of evil in Islam. Should we have a belief system, a law and a doctrine which endorses, justifies and defends slavery in the 21st century?
handy says
there is a book called WHITE GOLD, from a diary of an Englishman taken from a merchant’s ship and enslaved by muslims in the early 1800’s highly revealing about the slave trade