Wall Street Journal front page feature, the black McCains

Interesting isn't it, when Barack Obama has slave owners both in his African ancestry and his American white ancestry, that WSJ choses 2 weeks before the election to write about McCain's ancestors who owned slaves?

The first Islamic assault on African culture was the jihad that annihilated Coptic Egyptian culture and Greek culture in Northern Africa. Today these areas are Arabic and Islamic.

That was just the thin end of the jihad wedge. Over the next 1400 years, Islam took approximately 25 million slaves out of Africa. An Arabic word for African is abd, the same word that is used for black slave. Arabic has about 40 words for slaves. White slaves are mamluk. Islam took more than a million European slaves into slavery. The highest priced slave in the Meccan slave market was a white woman.

There is great deal of collateral damage when a slave is taken. A warring party attacks a tribe and when enough of the protectors are killed, the rest will surrender and become slaves. All of those who were strong enough to work were taken away in a forced march for days. But there are many who are left behind -- the young, the old, and the sick and injured.

Estimates vary, but from 5 to 10 people left behind died as the result of taking one slave. So for 25 million slaves, we have the deaths of 125 million Africans over a 1400-year period.

When the story of slavery is told in America, as in the movie Roots, the sailors get off the boats and capture the Africans and make them slaves. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

When the white slaver showed up in his wooden ship, he made a business deal with a Muslim wholesaler. Jihad was the machinery that Mohammed used, and his model worked well in Africa as slavers filled the slave pens for the same reason that Mohammed did it: profit. Whites only traded slaves with Islam for about 200 years. Islam was in the slave trade before and after selling to the West

.From every educational and personal achievement measurement, the black McCains and the white McCains seem pretty well matched in the 21st century, regardless of what transpired in the 19th century. We'll never know if the NGOs and western aid hadn't virtually destroyed African culture and propped up despots, 21st Africans would be doing as well as 21st century African-Americns.

WSJ news coverage is among the most liberal of all the MSM. It's difficult to tell sometimes if journalists or left wing social workers are doing the writing, because much of it belongs on the op-ed pages. Generally, the editorial staff and letters to the editor are conservative. I wonder, do the two cultures of this paper even sit together in the lunch room?