Sharia Law: Coming to a Neighborhood Near You.

[MAD]

 

[volbound1700]

No. You're the one who is wrong. There was no mass displacement of people. There was simply the Arabization of those populations. Much of Northern Sudan is considered Arab today. Yet if you look at the people they look black. Many look no different than populations in neighboring countries like Ethiopia and South Sudan. Why are they considered Arabs? Because they adopted the Arabic language and customs. Same thing happened in much of Northern Africa where it was mostly Berbers but they now speak Arabic and are considered Arabs. The same thing happened in the middle east. This Arabization is just not as obvious as it is in a place like Sudan because the Assyrians and Chaldeans for example probably looked very similar to the early Arabs. So when they got Arabized it was not as obvious as when the Sudanese were Arabized.

This is why genetically that whole region is so similar. The majority of Semitic speaking populations outside of Africa carry Y-DNA haplogroup J while the Afro-Asiatic speaking populations within Africa carry Y-DNA haplogroup E. If there was this mass spread of Arabs displacing these native non-Arab populations we would see it in the genetics. But instead what the genetics show is that the Arab world is very distinct genetically with clear separation between the African populations and the non-African populations.

Weren't you the guy that was previously claiming that the white Arabs replaced the Black Egyptians? Kind of arguing against yourself now.

Go read about the Assyrians, their DNA and ethnicity is different from modern Iraqi Arabs.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Weren't you the guy that was previously claiming that the white Arabs replaced the Black Egyptians? Kind of arguing against yourself now.

Go read about the Assyrians, their DNA and ethnicity is different from modern Iraqi Arabs.

No. The people in modern Egypt carry the same paternal Y-DNA haplogroup as East Africans. Both are mostly E1b1b. The difference is in North Africa you have significant Eurasian admixture in the mitochondrial DNA which is passed from mother to daughter. And that's because millions of European slaves were imported into North Africa during the Barbary Slave Trade. Most of these slaves were female sex slaves. The indigenous North Africans mixed with these women to create the modern mixed population of North Africa. You can find the details of this Slave trade in this book:

White Slavery in the Barbary States: Lord Charles Sumner: 9781389865947: Amazon.com: Books

White Slavery in the Barbary States [Lord Charles Sumner] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. White Slavery in the Barbary States

www.amazon.com

So yes there was race mixing in North Africa but it wasn’t Arab males invading the region. It was white female slaves being brought in by the Moors.

 

[MAD]

 

[EasternVol]

Wrong. Take Iraq and the Assyrians as an example. They were the majority population in Northern Iraq pre-Islamic conquest, now there is less than a million of then left in Iraq. The ethnicity of the areas conquered by Muslims has mostly changed. This is why you don't have Babylonians/Chaldeans, Egyptians (Coptics), Phoenicians, Assyrians, etc. still around or majority in their formal homelands. They are primary Arab today.
Christianity did not spread by war. Read Acts. The events you are talking about are well past 1000 AD and over 1000 years past Christ.

Aren't Muslim Iraqis, Egyptians, etc. descended from Assyrians, Copts, etc.?
Christianity absolutely spread by conquest.

 

[volbound1700]

Aren't Muslim Iraqis, Egyptians, etc. descended from Assyrians, Copts, etc.?
Christianity absolutely spread by conquest.

Nope, look it up.

Christianity converted the Roman Empire via Missionary work. Show me examples of Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc. leading armies into battle? Mohammad and his successors did that. In fact, every land that is Muslim today outside of Indonesia and Pacific area, saw Islam spread by the sword.

 

[volbound1700]

No. The people in modern Egypt carry the same paternal Y-DNA haplogroup as East Africans. Both are mostly E1b1b. The difference is in North Africa you have significant Eurasian admixture in the mitochondrial DNA which is passed from mother to daughter. And that's because millions of European slaves were imported into North Africa during the Barbary Slave Trade. Most of these slaves were female sex slaves. The indigenous North Africans mixed with these women to create the modern mixed population of North Africa. You can find the details of this Slave trade in this book:

View attachment 772713

White Slavery in the Barbary States: Lord Charles Sumner: 9781389865947: Amazon.com: Books

White Slavery in the Barbary States [Lord Charles Sumner] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. White Slavery in the Barbary States

www.amazon.com

So yes there was race mixing in North Africa but it wasn’t Arab males invading the region. It was white female slaves being brought in by the Moors.

Yeah, you are full of it and no credible historian would buy your nonsense.

The "white" slave trade was too tiny to have any major population impact. The Arab world brought tons of black slaves in via Timbuktu and Gao and Sahara slave roughs. Also through East Africa via Mogadishu, Zanzibar, and the Silwa Kingdom. In fact, Islamic states in Africa were the first major states that engaged in the slave trades in 1000 A.D. The Portuguese that arrived in 1500s started buying slaves from a system that was already well-established with the Arab world.

 

[volbound1700]

For the posters on here who are ignorant of history. You can simply look up Wikipedia and find the details (or linked articles).

Assyrian people - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

From Wikipedia:

From the 7th century AD onwards, Mesopotamia saw a steady influx of Arabs, Kurds and other Iranian peoples,[113] and later Turkic peoples. Assyrians were increasingly marginalized, persecuted and gradually became a minority in their homeland. Conversion to Islam was a result of heavy taxation, which also resulted in decreased revenue from their rulers. As a result, the new converts migrated to Muslim garrison towns nearby.


Basically, they got supplanted in their own lands very similar to how Americans supplanted Native Americans.

Further details on how they were persecuted and even slowly exterminated (notably by Ottomans):

Indigenous Assyrians became second-class citizens (dhimmi) in a greater Arab Islamic state. Those who resisted Arabization and conversion to Islam were subject to severe religious, ethnic, and cultural discrimination and had certain restrictions imposed upon them.[109] Assyrians were excluded from specific duties and occupations reserved for Muslims. They did not enjoy the same political rights as Muslims, and their word was not equal to that of a Muslim in legal and civil matters. As Christians, they were subject to payment of a special tax, the jizya.[110]

They were banned from spreading their religion further or building new churches in Muslim-ruled lands, but were expected to adhere to the same laws of property, contract, and obligation as the Muslim Arabs.[110] They could not seek the conversion of a Muslim, a non-Muslim man could not marry a Muslim woman, and the child of such a marriage would be considered a Muslim. They could not own an enslaved Muslim and had to wear different clothing from Muslims to be distinguishable. In addition to the jizya tax, they were required to pay the kharaj tax on their land, which was heavier than the jizya. However, they were protected, given religious freedom, and to govern themselves according to their own laws.[111]


As non-Islamic proselytising was punishable by death under Sharia, the Assyrians were forced into preaching in Transoxiana, Central Asia, India, Mongolia and China where they established numerous churches. The Church of the East was considered to be one of the major Christian powerhouses in the world, alongside Latin Christianity in Europe and the Byzantine Empire (Greek Orthodoxy).[112]

 

[volbound1700]

The behavior towards the Assyrians that is well documented was common in all the lands that fell under the Arab Caliphates and, as I stated, entire groups of people that had existed in Antiquity disappeared or became minorities in their own lands while Arab people and culture spread all throughout the Middle Easts to lands that Arabs had not been before.

 

[EasternVol]

Nope, look it up.

I have. Many are.

Christianity converted the Roman Empire via Missionary work. Show me examples of Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc. leading armies into battle? Mohammad and his successors did that. In fact, every land that is Muslim today outside of Indonesia and Pacific area, saw Islam spread by the sword.

And the Roman Empire spread Christianity to their conquered lands.
Followers of Jesus et al spread Christianity through conquest and coercion. Why differentiate between OG and follower? Spread by conquest is spread by conquest.
You left out East Africa, Sub Saharan areas and the Sahel, and Central, East, and Southeast Asia.
How's the comparison on forced conversions in conquered areas?

 

[volbound1700]

I have. Many are.

And the Roman Empire spread Christianity to their conquered lands.
Followers of Jesus et al spread Christianity through conquest and coercion. Why differentiate between OG and follower? Spread by conquest is spread by conquest.
You left out East Africa, Sub Saharan areas and the Sahel, and Central, East, and Southeast Asia.
How's the comparison on forced conversions in conquered areas?

Roman Empire did not take a single new region after Trajan. If you disagree, show me the area they took on the map that wasn't already a part of Pagan Rome and conquered/Romanised by Pagan Rome.

You literally don't know history... why not be silent until you study up and learn.

 

[EasternVol]

Roman Empire did not take a single new region after Trajan. If you disagree, show me the area they took on the map that wasn't already a part of Pagan Rome and conquered/Romanised by Pagan Rome.

Read it again and you should get the meaning.

You literally don't know history... why not be silent until you study up and learn.

That's rich coming from you, whose version of history always slants toward your favored groups and whose timelines always stop at your ideal scenario. You're a dilettante the same as most of us here.