My Opinion

What does Islam really teach about forced conversion?

Muslims are called upon to fight unbelievers until they are either dead, converted to Islam or are in a permanent state of submission under Muslim rule. Allowing people of other faiths to live and reverence independently of Islamic rule is not an available option.

Muhammad's efforts to recruit peacefully in Mecca were not really crowned with success. In 13 years, he managed to convince less than 100 followers, mostly friends and family. His tactics changed drastically during his last ten years. As soon as he had sufficient power, he began to force others with the sword-head to recognize him as a prophet and Allah as the only God. In many places in Hadith, he tells his successors that Allah has commanded him to fight unbelievers until they profess their faith in Islam (the Shahada).

During the later years, Muhammad did not appear to be at all disturbed by the fact that conversions were usually carried out under obvious compulsion. These include those of his sworn enemy of Abu Sufyan and his wife Hind. According to Muslim historians, when Abu Sufyan sought peace with Muhammad, he was instead forced to convert to Islam. The exact words which he was to speak in the presence of Muhammad were: "Say and testify that there is no God but Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah before you lose your head" (Ibn Ishaq / Hisham 814).

The entire city of Mecca converted to Islam, although the inhabitants and leaders originally abhorred Muhammad and resisted his sermons. Most of them "converted" to Islam on the day when he entered the city abruptly with an army. Only the most gullible would think that this is a genuine religious epiphany that coincides coincidentally with the time when a sword is held to their necks.

Meccans who did not want to change their religion were forcibly expelled from the city after the last Haj (9:5). The Christians and Jews who lived in Arabia at that time suffered the same fate. The cause was a kind permission of a murder order from Muhammad. They were given the choice either to accept Islam or be expelled from their land (Sahih Muslim 19:4366).

The Jews in Khaybar were not at war with Muhammad when he ordered his jihadis to attack them. Even his faithful son-in-law Ali, who was to lead the mission to Muhammad's instructions, was somewhat confused about the pretext under which he was to attack this peaceful peasant community, far from Medina:

Muhammad said: "Proceed on and do not look about until Allah grants you victory", and Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: "Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people?"

Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: "Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger" (Sahih Muslim 31:5917)

The Jews were, of course, quite surprised. Their wealth was stolen and their wives and children were taken and sold by the Prophet of Islam and his men as slaves. Muhammad even took a woman, after the death of her husband, for himself.

Before he died, Muhammad sent his warriors against pagan Arab tribes, like the al-Harith, and demanded that they should either be converted to Islam or extinguished. In the great selection which they had, they naturally chose the "religion of peace". He cursed Christians and Jews until his last breath (Bukhari 8:427).

According to al-Shafi from "The ordinances of the Koran", "Muhammad defeated the people until they bend Islam or break". Muslims are taught to follow their prophet. A messenger under Umar's rule has formulated it, "Our Prophet, the messenger of the Lord, has commanded us to fight them until you worship Allah alone or pay Jizya (i.e., tribute)" (Bukhari 53:386).

It also expressed Abu Bakr, Muhammad's closest companion and immediate successor, when he aggressively invaded foreign territory in jihad and protested against people who did not want war and were not a threat. In a letter to the Persians, the Caliph declared bluntly, "You have be converted to Islam, and then you will be safe, if you do not, you must know that I will come to you with an army which loves the same way the death as you love life."

Over the centuries, Muslims have forced Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Gentiles, and others to accept Islam by either offering them death as an alternative or making their lives so miserable (taxes, denial of rights, etc.) that they finally converted to Islam.

There are compulsory conversions among extremists to this day. Recently, a Christian girl was kidnapped in Egypt and told that she would be raped if she did not convert. In 2010, an 11-year-old Christian boy was enslaved in Pakistan by his Muslim landlords. He proudly told the world that he would free the boy if he would convert to Islam.

None of these examples of attempted forced conversion was condemned by Islamic organizations, including in the West. From the Muslim perspective, the victim in any case retains technically the "choice" to convert, even if the only alternative is death. In fact, some even praised the Pakistani slave owner for magnanimous worship of freedom and debt relief to his theme for the embrace of Islam.

Since Muslims believe so sincerely that their religion is truth, they often can't help but feel, on some level, that forced conversion is more of a favor done to the subject - a case of the end justifying the means. As Muhammad said, "Allah wonders at those people who will enter Paradise in chains." (Bukhari 52:254).

After the high-caliber abduction and forced conversion of hundreds of Christian girls of Boko Haram in 2014, a Muslim woman in the United Kingdom proclaimed that the girls had actually been liberated from the "fetters of slavery".

It is also important to note the critical role that Jizya plays in the Islamic world. According to the Quran, the payment of a "tax" to the Muslims is the only way out for those who do not want to deny their religion. This source of income explains why Muhammad and his successor do not force anyone to commit to Islam after a military conquest.

Muhammad realized in the case of the Jews of Khaybar who were allowed to keep their farming as long as they abolished the profits of their labor to him that it was more lucrative to save the local economy in the place than to kill any man who was not converted. This loose rule followed the Muslim armies that swept through Christian, Jewish, Persian, Hindu and Buddhist countries throughout the centuries. Parts of the collected money were used to finance further Islamic military expansions, which in turn produced more income and more "converts".

As Muhammad said it by himself: "My sustenance is under the shade of my spear, and he who disobeys my orders will be humiliated by paying Jizya" (or by another translation: "My provision has been placed under the shadow of my spear, and abasement and humility have been placed on the one who disobeys my command.") This hadith has been quoted by al-Qaeda and is found in the original version of Bukhari and Ahmad (5114 or 4869, depending on the translation).

In fairness it must be said that Muslims generally tend to follow verse 2:256 of the Koran, saying, "There is no compulsion in religion" and it is not right to force others to embrace Islam. But this does not change religion itself. Verse 2:256 was clearly overthrown by later verses, especially of Sura 9, otherwise the practice of killing apostates if they reject their previous creed would not have become an acceptable part of Islamic law.

Another point must be kept in mind. It is an important part of faith in Islam. Muslims are ordered to fight unbelievers until they say they believe in Allah or pay the Jizya. But there seems to be a tacit understanding that faith itself can not be compelled. (Really meant is "compulsion in religion"). However, as soon as a subjugated individual is converted to Islam under the burden of taxes and discrimination, a possible death penalty must also be revoked. The children also have to be educated as Muslims. And if they do not, they are exposed to garbage and killing. Thus, Islam succeeded in spreading successfully within the conquered populations in high percentages.

It is ironic that the Muslim community is most sensitive to a non-Muslim presence in "Muslim countries". Especially if these countries were not originally Muslim until they were conquered by force. The crass double standard is tempered purely rhetorically by explaining that Islam is the original religion practiced by Jews (like Moses) and Christians (like Jesus and his followers). Thus, the conquered populations are "restored". As many Muslims already seem to realize, this trick is neither wise nor even less convincing.

A final point of interest is that Muhammad's practice of obliging people to profess their faith in him was catastrophic for his own family and the legacy of his religion. At the time of his death, his empire comprised a great multitude of people and tribes, who had accepted his rule only to avoid war and bondage. Many of them, after he died, immediately wanted their freedom and self-determination back. There were several wars, causing thousands of deaths. The legacy of violent intolerance was firmly cemented in Islam.

Even Muhammad's sworn enemy, Abu Sufyan, has got a last laugh. So ambitious was the prophet of Islam to expand his empire, forcing his former archenemy to convert with the tip of his sword. Nevertheless, it was Abu Sufyan's own children who ultimately benefited - at the expense of Muhammad's family.

Abu Sufyan's son, Muawiyah, inherited the kingdom after defeating Muhammad's adopted son Ali. He also poisoned Hasan, one of the two dearest grandchildren of the Prophet. Abu Sufyan's grandson, Yazid, became the next caliph and immediately demanded the head of Muhammad's other favorite grandchild, Hussein. This was brought to him on a plate.

Koran 8:38-39

Say to those who have disbelieved, if they cease (from disbelief) their past will be forgiven. But if they return (thereto), then the examples of those (punished) before them have already preceded (as a warning). (8:38)

And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do. (8:39)

Koran 9:29

Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Sureas 9 and 5 are the last great chapters that Muhammad narrated, replacing what had come before, including the oft-quoted verse 2:256 - "There is no compulsion in religion ...".

Koran 9:5

Then when the Sacred Months (the Ist, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikun (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Prayer and poor tax are among the five pillars of Islam, as salat and zakat. (See below). The Quran thus sanctions violence as a means of forced conversion.

Koran 9:11

But if they repent, perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat) and give Zakat, then they are your brethren in religion. (In this way) We explain the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) in detail for a people who know.

In connection with the preceding passage, this confirms that Muhammad speaks of conversion to Islam.

Koran 9:56-57

They swear by Allah that they are truly of you while they are not of you, but they are a people (hypocrites) who are afraid (that you may kill them). (9:56)

Should they find a refuge, or caves, or a place of concealment, they would turn straightway thereto with a swift rush. (9:57)

This refers to people who live with the Muslim tribe, but can not truly be believers. They must pretend to be believing to survive. They have no safe refuge to escape the Muslims. If Islam were a religion of peace, then why are they afraid?

Koran 2:193

And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)

The key phrase is here: "and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone)".

Koran 3:83

Do they seek other than the religion of Allah (the true Islamic Monotheism worshipping none but Allah Alone), while to Him submitted all creatures in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly. And to Him shall they all be returned.

But did not the earlier verse 2:256 say that there is no compulsion in religion? This contradiction is resolved by abolition - where the later verse replaces the earlier one.

These are the dangers of forcing others to recognize you as a prophet. Even if they do not consider it true.

Some proponents of Islam consider themselves to be especially cunning if they cite only half the truth from the Koran. These apologists do not consider that they are even more unbelievable than they already are. Thus, these professional liars and rejectors have published the following text at the Fiqh Council of North America:

Verse 5:32 promotes the universal principle that all life is sanctified for Allah. It says, "Whoever kills a human being, it is as if he had killed all men, and whoever keeps it alive, it is as if he kept all men alive."

It is what the apologists want non-Muslims to believe and what is not in this form in the Koran, and in contrast to the dozens of other open passages which lead to warfare, decapitation and torture. But also the above-mentioned quote from verse 5:32 is not quite as it appears. There are just a few words missing. The full verse is:

On account of that incident, We ordained for the Children of Israel that whoever kills a person, except as a punishment for murder or mischief in the land, it will be written in his book of deeds as if he had killed all the human beings on the surface of the Earth and whoever will save a life shall be regarded as if he gave life to all the human beings on the surface of the Earth. Yet, even though Our Rasools came to them one after the other with clear revelations, it was not long before, many of them committed excesses in the land.

First you notice the gaping gap. Killing is permitted in cases of murder or "for the spread of mischief on the earth". Murder is fairly simple, but "spread mischief"? If anything required a careful and accurate explanation, this would be such a phrase that allows torture. But the generations of Muslims themselves are left to their own interpretation of what "mischief" means - with different standards. Violation of the Sharia (Islamic law) or the sharing of another religious belief seems to qualify. Verse 7:103 of the Koran even shows that the mere rejection of Muhammad and the Quran is considered a "mischief".

Considering the wider context of this verse, it turns out that this is not a divine commandment for Muslims. It is a repetition of a rule given to the Jews (in fact, from the Talmud). It is no warning against killing. It is an imaginary accusation against the Jews because it has violated the law conferred upon them. By "who" is not meant "anyone", but any of the Jews.

Any application to Muslims should apply only to Muslims - as with Muslim-to-Muslim murder within the brotherhood of the Faithful. In fact, the context of the verse is the murder of Abel by Cain. Historically, this verse has never been so interpreted by Islamic scholars that the lives of Muslims and non-Muslims are equivalent to Allah. The Koran says that the reparation of a murder is bound to the law of equality (2:178) and that non-believers are not equal to the Muslims (39:9). Muhammad confirmed that a Muslim can be punished with death for the killing of a fellow Muslim, but a Muslim should never be killed for the killing of a non-believer.

Rather than promote tolerance, Sura 5 as a whole is indeed an incitement to hatred with a touch of violence. Later, in the chapter, Jews and Christians were cursed as "evil" people with "sick hearts" and as hateful "blasphemers". Muhammad also reminds his people that Allah loves only those who "fight" in his ministry - and it is quite obvious who the enemy is.

Even Muslim apologists disregard the fact that verse 5:32 immediately follows a cruel verse, which, in the case of the above-mentioned "disaster," actually prescribes killing-and this was not taken from the Talmud. He even indicates the crucifixion and "cutting off hands and feet from opposite sides". (This arrangement was compulsorily observed by the IS in 2014):

The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter. (5:33)

Although verse 5:32 is a law given to the Jews, the following verse 5:33 counts unambiguously and for the Muslims. (One must imagine that instead of the law against murder and only to let go of anger, Jesus would have said, "You have heard that it is said that all life is holy, but I tell you that those who are waging war against God, should get crucified ... "

Verse 5:33 is the foundation for laws against blasphemy. On this basis, people can get executed for insulting Islam. Ironically, this part of the Koran will be used by apologists to portray Islam as a nonviolent religion. It has long been used as a justification for the punishment of oral capital crimes.

This passage is the best example of the moral side of the Quran. This verse is in fact the basis for the torture and execution of persons who interfere or threaten Islamic hegemony.

In this way, it is the best thing Islam has to offer. Therefore it is not difficult to guess why the religion contributes every year to more than a thousand lethal terrorist attacks on the world.

The early part of the Koran came into being when Muhammad lived in Mecca, a city with very few Jews and Jewish tribes. At that time, he presented himself to the Meccans as a Jewish prophet based on the stories he had learned from the Jews he had learned during his travels - and from his cousin Waraqa to a converted Jew (The Koran actually refers to this charge , But "Allah" denies it).

When Muhammad moved to Medina there were already three Jewish tribes, whose good graces he first needed, because he and his small bonds of Muslim immigrants were too weak. He tried to convince these Jews that he was the last in the succession of their own prophets and even changed the Qibla (prayer direction) to Jerusalem, the center of the Jewish world.

The Jews in Medina were not impressed by the esoteric assertions of Muhammad, especially since there were obvious discrepancies between their Torah and his version of the same stories. (In the Koran, the Bible is immature in the Bible and sounds more like a series of fairy tales with the same superfluous morality - believing Muhammad's claims about himself or experiencing earthly destruction and eternal torment).

When he was asked why he had no proof of his prophethood by performing miracles like the prophets of the past, Muhammad came up with a prudent apology that there was no point in the past since the Jews were prophets anyway (Koran 3:183-184). Thus Muhammad had nothing to offer but his own testimony.

The Prophet of Islam did not treat the Jewish rejection well, especially since his people had relied heavily on his many claims to be a prophet in the same way like Moses, Abraham and Jesus. Muhammad "solved" his dilemma by claiming that the Jews of Medina were heretics, and that his version of the Torah is a fake, since it "did not contain the verses" that supported his claims to be a prophet. (Interestingly, in spite of the many Jews, who were either converted to Islam from either compulsion or free will, the "unadulterated" Torah never came to light, which supposedly existed).

After Muhammad's victory against the Meccans in Badr, his wealth and power was so far that he could take care of his "Jewish problem". The words of the Koran are markedly harder to the "people of the book" in the Medina part of the text, and it goes into confrontation.

Much got done by the "constitution" of Medina, but the treaty that Muhammad created for all local tribes upon his arrival got temporarily forgotten. The Muslims have often forgotten to cancel or annul a contract. However, this contract got canceled after less than two years:

While we were in the Mosque, the Prophet came out and said, "Let us go to the Jews" We went out till we reached Bait-ul-Midras. He said to them, "If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he is permitted to sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle." (Bukhari 53:392)

After announcing his intentions, Muhammad sought an apology to take land from those Jews who refused to convert to Islam. His first goal was a tribe that had recently been in a conflict with the other two. Muhammad has correctly advised that the two other Jewish tribes would not come to support the Banu Qaynuqa tribe during a siege.

Muhammad's excuse has been an incident in which a Muslim was killed by the angry Jewish mob. The fact that the mob was furious because the Muslim in question had just murdered a Jewish merchant for the honor of a woman is sometimes denied by contemporary advocates of Islam who nevertheless admit that Muhammad decided to siege the Qaynuqa fort instead of his peaceful determination To agitation.

This point is important. According to Muslim historians, the first blood shed was when a Jew was murdered by a Muslim for playing a prank on a Muslim woman (by lifting her dress). The Muslim was killed in retaliation by those who had just witnessed the murder.

On what basis is physical violence - much less murder - justified by such a prank? Moreover, if Muhammad believed in the Old Testament law of the "eye for eye," why did he not recognize the legitimacy of the second killing against the inequality of the first?

In any case, the self-proclaimed prophet of God answered with a self-serving power against a people who had taken him into their community less than two years earlier. Unprepared for the battle, the Qaynuqa surrendered to their former guest without fighting.

Muhammad wanted to kill the entire tribe, but this was ruined by an Arab friend who was horrified by his intentions:

Abdullah b. Ubayy b. Salul went to him when God had put them in his power and said, "O Muhammad, deal kindly with my clients" (now they were allies of Khazraj), but the apostle put him off. He repeated the words, and the apostle turned away from him, whereupon he thrust his hand into the collar of the apostle's robe; the apostle was so angry that his face became almost black.
He said, "Confound you, let me go."
He answered, "No, by God, I will not let you go until you deal kindly with my clients. Four hundred men without mail and three hundred mailed protected me from all mine enemies; would you cut them down in one morning? By God, I am a man who fears that circumstances may change"
The apostle said, “You can have them.” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 546)

Muhammad allowed the Jews of Qaynuqa to escape with what they could carry. He confiscated their wealth and their land, took a fifth for himself and gave the remaining to the rest of the Muslims. (According to the Koran, this was their punishment for those who do not believe in Muhammad. 3:10-12)

The man who saved the lives of the Jews was later called from Muhammad to be a hypocrite, and it is obvious that he deeply regretted his decision not to kill the Qaynuqa. One of the nine Koranic verses, which forbids Muslims taking Jews and Christians as friends, was "revealed" at this time.

Thus, Muhammad was able to fulfill his own promise that "Those who oppose Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad), they will be among the lowest (most humiliated)." (Koran 58:20), further strengthening his credibility among the Muslims and inspiring fourteen centuries of unrelenting jihad in his name to his followers.

The Quran makes a great deal of cases about itself. It says that it is the ideal and upright disclosure of God to man, and that it is important to the point that it has existed endlessly on tablets in paradise.

Faultfinders assert that it is a seriously masterminded gathering of citations from one man, go off as the expression of God to a guileless crowd in a primitive society. At the point when blamed for being a lunatic, for instance, Muhammad would go into his tent and afterward develop with a pearl 'from Allah' like, "You (Muhammad) are not a madman" (68:2). The general population would then take this as evidence that he was most certainly not.

A few Muslims say that the Quran would not be accepted by such a large number of today in the event that it were not valid. In any case, conviction does not make truth – especially when it must be indecently implemented with segregation, mutilating and demise.

Truth be told, most Muslims have never perused the Quran, a book they (in any case) will murder and pass on over. Their conviction depends on what they get notification from different Muslims, especially as they are growing up.

A target peruser would probably reason that the Quran is less a result of awesome root than Muhammad's creative energy and the conditions in which he got himself.

Here are ten quick cases:

1. As specified, regardless of being a little book, the Quran should be the immortal, unchangeable expression of God. Why might God utilize valuable and significant space on the individual existence of one man - a similar one who happens to portray the "disclosure"?

   Consider verse 33:53:

   O you who believe! Enter not the Prophet's houses, except when leave is given to you for a meal, (and then) not (so early as) to wait for its preparation. But when you are invited, enter, and when you have taken your meal, disperse, without sitting for a talk. Verily, such (behaviour) annoys the Prophet, and he is shy of (asking) you (to go), but Allah is not shy of (telling you) the truth.

   That must be deified on a tablet in paradise?

   Significant bits of the Quran (especially suras 33 and 66) are similarly self-serving and address the sex, cash or regard from his spouses to which Muhammad is entitled. Additionally, a few such sections are redundant.

   Couldn't Allah have thought about a more critical message for humanity than letting us know (a few times over) that Muhammad may lay down with a boundless number of ladies?

2. The Quran says that composed duplicates of the Bible (Torah and Gospel) existed at the season of Muhammad (29:46, 3:3, 3:78) and a considerable number verses "affirm" that those duplicates are valid (regardless of the possibility that the Jews and Christians were later blamed for misconstruing them "with their tongues"). Parts of the Quran clearly depend on the Bible for culmination and numerous verses demand that the Word of God can't be changed or debased.

   Here's the issue:

   There are several New Testament original copies that pre-date the season of Muhammad, all found at various times and better places by various individuals. There are hundreds a greater amount of the Torah. All concur splendidly with the current adaptation of the Bible, which repudiates the Quran.

   In the meantime, not a solitary duplicate or part of either the Torah or Gospel from any period has ever been discovered which veers off in a way that concurs with the Quran.

   How is that the "genuine" Bible - the one that as far as anyone knows affirms the Quran - never made due in any shape, while such a large number of "defiled" duplicates did?

   Is it safe to say that it isn't more probable that Muhammad basically made it up as he came and later blamed Christians and Jews as a main story for his own particular missteps?

3. Not at all like the Old Testament prophets, Muhammad described negligible safeguards of his claim as a prophet (and even his own particular rational soundness) that are strikingly excess.

   For instance, no less than 8 entries (83:13, 27:68, 46:17, 16:24, 6:25, 26:137, 25:5 and 23:83) say that "Allah's messenger" is blamed for rehashing "tales of the ancients," yet that any individual who doesn't trust him will smolder in Hell. Is there any good reason why allah wouldn't simply say it once and afterward utilize the rest of the space for something all the more illuminating?

   Isn't this a greater amount of what one would anticipate from an excessively cautious poseur than from an interminable disclosure of God to man?

4. The Quran says that it is "clear", yet then says somewhere else (3:7) that lone Allah comprehends the importance of a few verses (which makes one wonder of why they are there). It says that it clarifies "all things" (16:89), however then advises Muslims to take after the case of Muhammad (33:21) - without saying what that is.

   In down to earth terms, it is difficult to comprehend the Quran without references to outer sources, for example, the Hadith and Sira (generally laid out in voluminous commentaries). However these sources are regularly conflicting and never concurred on.

   Indeed, even in the Quran, passionate Muslim researchers induce drastically extraordinary implications from similar verses. For instance, most elucidations of 38:33 say that Solomon sliced at his own steeds, disjoining their legs and necks. Notwithstanding, some contemporary interpreters, including a standout amongst the most regarded (Yusuf Ali) say that Solomon truly just ignored his hand their bodies affectionately.

   Additional disturbing (and shockingly more run of the mill) are verses like 5:33, which orders killing the individuals who "wage war on Allah"... without truly clarifying what this implies.

5. The Quran tells Muslim men that they may engage in sexual relations with ladies caught as slaves. Far more terrible: the entry is rehashed in four better places. By differentiation, there is not a solitary verse that advises Muslims that they are to supplicate five times each day.
   
   

6. The Quran confounds Mary the mother of Jesus with Mary the sister of Aaron (and Moses) in Sura 19.

   In spite of tormented rational theology, the least difficult and most evident clarification is that Muhammad was mixed up. This would likewise clarify why the Quran that he described wrongly expresses that Christians revere the Virgin Mary as a divine being (5:75, 5:116) when they never have.

7. Regardless of being a moderately little book, the Quran contains pointless repetitions. Moses is specified 136 times. A few sections of misquoted Bible stories are almost word-for-word indistinguishable (e.g. Suras 20 and 26).

   Why might God squander space saying basically a similar thing in regards to something dark when he could have offered clear good standards about peace, resistance (or sex with youngsters)?

8. Such an extensive amount the Quran is committed to repetitive cases and dangers about Muhammad's status as a prophet, yet there is not a solitary unique good esteem. No place does it advise men not to assault ladies or forgo sex with kids. Actually, it gives men consent to assault their slaves and suggests that sex with kids is passable (verse 65:4).

   Wouldn't a flawless book show consummate ethical quality?

9. Verse 5:3 says that the Islamic religion was "perfected" and "finished" on "this day", yet 249 more verses tail it, including two extra Suras (9 and 110).

   Additionally, how could the Quran be interminable if sometime in the past it was not finished?

10. Verse 27:91 peruses "For me, I have been commanded to serve the Lord of this city." If these are the expressions of Allah, then it would imply that somebody is "commanding" him to serve another god. The verse just bodes well if Muhammad is talking from his own particular point of view.

    (This would likewise clarify why "Allah" guarantees to Allah in no less than seven different verses).

Timeless... unchangeable... perfect?
Mmm... maybe not.

Like all other "holy books" the Quran got written by humans after the death of Mohammed. Only the mighty ones and the savants have been able to write in ancient time. So you find the influence and interpretation of such people inside the "holy scripts". Think about the value from quotes transported by mouth. Everybody forwards only these content what he has understood by himself. Errors and misunderstandings are inevitable in such a procedure. You only need to remember the kids game called silent message. Very seldom matches the result to that what has been provided to the start of the chain. Such a suspicious source got used for writing "holy scripts". Until here is no difference between the Islam and other religions.

The result has been that all these codices had differences in the same way like the content got transported from mouth to mouth by the people. The third Caliph, Uthman ibn Affan (644-656), burned all previous existing scripts and established a standard version known as Uthman's codex, which is generally considered the archetype of the Quran known today.

In the year 1389 the Muslim savant Ibn Khaldun wrote (Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs):

In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with "power politics," because Islam is "under obligation to gain power over other nations"

(Muqaddimah, trans. Rosenthal, p. 183).

and

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.

No other religions had no such universal mission and the holy war was not a religious duty to them apart from self-defense. This fact shows clearly that the Islam is nothing else than a dangerous teaching made from humans and not from any God. If a belief needs to get distributed by force, then this belief has no value because thoughts and opinions of people cannot get controlled. A God, however his name is or however you are calling him, is omniscient and omnipotent. For what does he need other humans to bring his rules and teachings by force to other people?

The mighty ones in ancient time have known this fact too and have decided by themselves to use troops instead of sending missionaries to other regions of the world. That shows that these mighty ones used their influence to get their wishes written into the "holy book" and not the truth. They are only using the Quran for hiding their own power hungry wishes from others. The Quran is nothing else than a excuse or a pretext for filling the pockets of the mighty ones without making themselves responsible for anything.

Another excuse get heard from time to time, that the Christians have loaded a lot blame with the Crusades. What is not known to many people but is the fact that it came only to the Crusades after the Muslims have almost 500 years (exactly 464 years long, from 635 until 1099 AD, (1099 = start of the first crusade)) invaded the Christian countries, they have robbed, terrorized and plundered. There were very many Christians murdered, raping their wives or sold together with their children into slavery. Christian churches were destroyed, burned down the houses of Christians and Christians had only to chose to convert to the Islam or to get killed by the Muslims.

For almost over 500 years, Muslim troops attacked formerly Christian countries such as Palestine, Syria, Jordan, Israel, Morocco, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Iran, Iraq, Spain, Portugal, parts of France, Sicily, Greece, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Romania, Armenia, Turkey (Byzantium), Cyprus, India, China and Pakistan. Not less cruel behave Muslims today towards the Muslims, who turn away from Islam: "whoever changes his religion ever, kill him."

For almost 500 years the Muslims in Christian countries left a wide trail of blood before Pope Urbans II 1095 called in Clermont to the liberation of Jerusalem and of the "holy land" (Israel) from the hands of the Muslims. During the reign of the Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim occurred 1009 the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, one of the largest sanctuaries of Christianity, which should be located at the historical place of the crucifixion and the tomb of Jesus.

When we talk about the Crusades, then you should familiarize yourself very well with the causes of the Crusades and study the historical process very carefully. Therefore historical events should be displayed now more detail. Of course, there were cruel excesses of all kinds by the Crusaders. It should be at all not secretive, glossed over or endorsed. They happened only after the Muslims had almost 500 years terrorized and murdered Christians. The Christian Crusades were essentially nothing more than the Christians attempting finally to put an end to the cruel terrorist of Muslims. This was achieved but only temporarily, namely at the time of the Crusades. After the Crusades, the Muslims blithely continue the conquest of Christian, Buddhist and Hindu countries with the same cruelty until today.

For a better understanding of historical events, I would like to insert two pictures representing very vividly the Muslim conquests:

• Expansion under Muhammad, 612-632
• Spread under the first three Caliphs, 632-655
• Spread under the Umayyad Caliphate 661-750

The above map shows the Islamic expansion during the time of Muhammad from 622 until 632 (dark). After the death of Muhammad ruled the 4 rightly guided Caliphs Abu Bakr, 632-634-Umar ibn al-Khattab, 634-644 - Uthman ibn Affan, 644-656 - Ali ibn Abi Talib, 656-661. The red area shows the expansion in this period. After the 4 rightly guided Caliphs, the Umayyads came to power. Their reign stretched from 661 to 750. The ocher-colored area shows the areas that they captured.

The next picture shows an overview of the Islamic expansion up to 1500:

Here is a list that shows that the Quran has been nothing else that "holy scripts" where the warlords could hide themselves behind it:

• 632 A.D. (467 years before the start of the Christian Crusades): Death of Muhammad
  At this time, Islam was already spreaded by raids across large parts of the Arabian peninsula. These aggressions continued after the death of the "prophet" and turned into a scene of constant wars throughout the Mediterranean for centuries. The subjugated were not allowed to carry any weapons, they were incapable of military service, therefore no full men. Christians and Jews had to wear clothing or special colors (this discrimination led to the Jewish star), to be marked as "Dhimmi" (non-believer or Protectee).

  They needed to accept to get hits from Muslims and have not been allowed to defend themselves. If a "dhimmi" struck back, then his hand got hacked off or he got executed. Any testimony of a "dhimmi" could not really got used against Muslims. Muslims needed to bear only half of their penalty for offenses of a "dhimmi" and they could never got executed. Conversely, the most cruel forms of executions have been mainly reserved the "dhimmi".

  They were not allowed to ride horses, but only on donkeys, so they were constantly reminded of their humiliation. (In the 19th century were Christian Copts in Egypt, after all, using horses, but only if they have been sitting backwards, facing backwards.) They paid a tribute (jizya), which needed to get paid in person, where they received a blow on the head.

• 635 A.D. (464 years before the start of the Crusades): a Muslim army conquered the Christian Byzantine Empire, Damascus, the capital of the former Christian Syria.

• 637/638 A.D. (462 years before the Crusades): a Muslim army conquered the Christian Byzantine Empire, Jerusalem. Capture of Jerusalem by Caliph Omar

• 642 A.D. (457 years before the Crusades): a Muslim army conquered the Christian Byzantine Empire, Alexandria, the capital of Christian Egypt.

• 645 A.D. (454 years before the Crusades): a Muslim army conquered the Christian Barka in North Africa (Libya).

• 674 A.D. (425 years before the Crusades): A Muslim attack on Constantinople (capital of the Christian Byzantine Empire and seat of the Christian emperor) got fended off

• 708 A.D. (391 years before the Crusades): The Muslim expansion to capture the Christian North Africa reached the Atlantic Coast (Spain).

• 710 A.D. (389 years before the Crusades): With the conquest of the last Christian town in North Africa is the entire former Christian North Africa is islamized. Nearly all of the 400 Christian dioceses in North Africa go down. North Africa was once a flourishing Christian world, has produced significant theologians of Christian antiquity: Tertullian, Cyprian, Athanasius, Augustine.

• 711 A.D. (388 years before the Crusades): Desecration of the Christian basilica located on the Temple Mount Santa Maria to the al-Aqsa Mosque by Abd el-Wahd. Today, the mosque there is considered third important on in Islam because Muhammad there allegedly prayed there on his "Heavenly journey", but he was at this time already buried 79 years in Medina. This magnificent Church was built once by the Christian Emperor Justinian (527-565). For Islam, converting a famous Church means also always win over Christianity. Legend formations are more important than historical facts in Islam.

  Qur'an (17: 1) gets used as an indication that the "prophet" made in the year 621 a "Night journey to Jerusalem" and was taken from there until the seventh heaven (maybe it has been a drug trip). In fact, there is no historical evidence that Muhammad ever has been in Jerusalem. Since the Prophet of Islam already died in 632, the Koran cannot mean the Church St. Maria, because the church got converted in the year 711, so 79 years after his death, to the el-Aqsa Mosque. The dome of the rock is also not in question, because this building was not even built at this time.

  One may assume that the rise into seventh heaven is rather a dream or imagination from Muhammad and cannot be regarded as a real event. The problem is that the Muslims consider this alleged journey to heaven as a real event. But something like this you can find in all religions. You can tell to the believers the biggest nonsense and the crowd believes it. The same is valid for the resurrection of Jesus after his death and ascension into heaven at Pentecost.

  Muslim armies crossed the Strait of Gibraltar and invade Europe. Andalusia is Arab (Islamic) after its Christian population was subjected to a bloody campaign and continuously suppressed. Just as in present-day Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Syria and Turkey today, all of which were once Christian countries. The Islamic Dhimmisystem (system of government) should thereby have been even worse than the South African apartheid system. Domination and not integration or tolerance was the goal of Islam. Not only in mission, but also by wars. Two powerful military conquests penetrated Islam after they had won before in the Middle East and in Africa, 711 they have been coming to Spain and at 1453 from Constantinople to Vienna. True to the alleged words of the prophet or the interpretation of the Koran by the respective caliphs and sultans foreign nations were either forcibly islamized, with all the consequences for the most oppressed women, or made to second class subjects with greatly restricted human rights.

• 712 A.D. (387 years before the Crusades): the conquest of southern Spain is completed. The Muslims were the last Arab rulers in Al-Andalus, Muhammad XII. more than 800 years in Spain, until finally needed to capitulate on January 2, 1492 before the two Christian (Catholic) armies of Ferdinand II. (the King of Sicily and Sardinia) and Isabella I (the Queen of Castile, the northern Spain).

  Parallel with the conquest of Spain the Arab Muslims in the East penetrated until 712 A.d. up to the borders of China, India and Pakistan. In Uzbekistan they conquered Turkish territories, coupled with their momentous Islamization, the Uzbeks the Arabs partly stubbornly opposed resistance. Soon the Arabs also undertook first forays to India and Pakistan. Another reaching out to Western and Central India was prevented by the defeat of 738 against the Indian regional rulers, whose armies had grown the Arab troops well. The conquest of India by Muslims claimed the lives of 80 million Indians and to have been the largest genocide (genocide) in the history.

  751 the Arabs defeated finally in the Battle of Talas a Chinese army since allegedly saw much of the Chinese troops, the Arabs as liberators and ran to them. As a result, the Chinese influence in Central Asia has been pushed back in favor of the Arab-Islamic.

• 713 A.D. (386 years before the Crusades): The Arabs conquer Barcelona, crossing the Pyrenees and begin the conquest of southern France. Around ninety years after Muhammad's death are Muslim armies (not missionaries!) In the Christian kingdom of the Franks (now France).

• 720 AD (379 years before the Crusades): The Arabs conquer Narbonne in southern France and besieging Toulouse

  From al-Andalus Arab troops conducted regular raids from deep into the outbacks of Christian France. They looted repeatedly by the Rhone valley, terrorized southern France, occupied Arles, Avignon, Nimes, Narbonne, which they set 793 on fire, devastated 981 Zamora and deported 4,000 prisoners. Four years later they burned down Barcelona, killed or enslaved all the inhabitants, devastated 987 Portuguese Coimbra, which then remained uninhabited for seven years, León destroyed along with environment. Responsible for the latter operations was the Amiriden ruler al-Mansur, "the Victorious" (981-1002) made sure that he all philosophical books that he could find got burned. and who led fifty wars during his reign, regularly one in spring and one in autumn. His most famous was that of 997 against the holy pilgrimage town of Santiago de Compostela. After they had razed it to the ground, a few thousand Christian survivors needed to went into slavery.

• 732 A.D. (376 years before the Crusades): Great decisive defensive battle by Charles Martel, the "hammer" of Tours (now France), the European armies won over the Mohammedan aggression. After that, the Christians had 123 years resting from Muslim attacks.

• 846 A.D. (253 years before the Crusades) Muslims pillage Rome. The attacks on Rome began in the seventh century A.D. The prototype of a Muslim invasion occurred in the year 846 as a fleet of Arab jihadists landed at the estuary of the Tiber River, marched to Rome, occupied the city and took all gold and silver from the St. Peter Basilica. This is the reason why the Vatican, due to the repeated attacks of the Muslims (Saracens), to a fortified "city within a city" in Rome. Following the devastation performances of the Saracens in the St., St. Peter's Basilica, which deeply shook the Christian world, was decided to secure the area around the tomb of Saint Peter. The completed area got the status of a city with its own right, which was separated from the Roman Forum, the Center of political, economic, cultural and religious life in Rome.

• 1009 A.D. (90 years before the Crusades): Caliph al-Hakim ordered the systematic destruction of all Christian sanctuaries, including the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. 1009 the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem by Muslims is destroyed, like so many others before. The plunder and expropriation of Christian churches is attributed to the Caliph al-Hakim, who also began at the beginning of the Millennium, to coerce the mainly Christian officials in his territory to the adoption of Islam.

• 1066 A.D. (33 years before the Crusades): held the first Jewish pogrom of in European history in the Spanish Granada (!) in the "Muslim-tolerant" Al Andalus. The Muslim masses, which at that time romp through the ghetto, call themselves "Muhadjirun" (faith fighters in exile).

• 1070 A.D. (29 years before the Crusades): the Seljuk Turks, a Turkish nomadic people from Central Asia, which itself had converted in the 10th century A.D. to Islam gains control of Jerusalem. The peaceful Christian pilgrimage to the Holy places is hampered increasingly in a massive way.

• 1071 A.D. (28 years before the Crusades): Battle of Manzikert, a Christian Byzantine army is defeated by a Muslim army. The Seljuk Turks conquer the core area of the Christian Byzantine Empire in Asia minor.

• 1095 A.D. (4 years before the Crusades): the Christian Byzantine Emperor Alexios I. Komnenos sends an letter to Pope Urban II. asking for military help. At the Council of Clermont, the first crusade in history gets decided.

• 1099 A.D. - 1293 A.D.: After almost four hundred and seventy years Mohammedan expansion by the sword followed by two centuries of Christian defense and (re) conquest in the form of various crusades.

• 1389 A.D.: Battle of Kosovo (Kosovo). A Christian army of Serbs, Bosnians and Bulgarians is destroyed by a Muslim army. The Christian Balkan states are Muslim vassals. Even during the 14th century the famous Muslim savant Ibn Khaldun wrote, although Judaism is able politically to survive in this world, but there was no universal claim, conversely, did Christianity although a universal claim, but it has not been following him with political and military means. Islam is superior to both religions, because he clubs both: "In Islam, jihad (holy war) is required by law, because it has a universal mission and is maintained, voluntary or forced to convert the whole world to the Islam" (The Muqaddima).

• 1423 A.D.: Venice, as a leading commercial and naval power in the Mediterranean, began with the help of his mercenaries to oppose the Ottoman Empire, when it saw threatened by the expansion of the Turks towards Adriatic Sea its trade interests. To secure its trading privileges in the Ottoman Empire, but it closed soon peace and Thessaloniki ceded to the Turks.

• 1453 A.D.: conquest of Constantinople Opel (now Istanbul) by Fatih (after him are named mosques in Europe), the center of the Eastern Roman Empire and the Orthodox Church. The Christian emperor falls in battle. End of the Christian Byzantine Empire. Mehmet II Fatih ("Mehmet the Conqueror") was a wise leader of the Ottoman Empire. A truly kind man, and made for his people, he always wanted only the best. Throughout Europe, name the Turkish citizens in memory of Mehmet "Fatih" mosques. The list of "Fatih"-mosques is long.

  But there is also another side of Mehmet II .:
  The Serbian author Konstantin Mihailovic writes in his "Memoirs of a Janissary" about him: "Sultan Mehmed had after his father Murad a happy reign. But he was also very cunning and deceiving if he could - even with the truce. Religion has not been important for him, but he was a famous man of war and had a lot of luck. He had no loyalty. If someone rebuked him, therefore, he roared like a madman. His handling of persons subject was ambivalent. So on the one hand reports of generous gestures and protection decrees, on the other hand writes Konstantin Mihailovic an eyewitness: "The entire army of the Sultan murdered and massacred on the streets, in the houses and in the churches."

  With the conquest of Constantinople there were also individual murders, such as on Megadux (Byzantine dignitary) Lukas Notaras, the Mehmed wanted previously used as a governor of Konstantin Opel. He made him and his sons executed because Notaras refused to provide his (pretty) 14 year old son to the Sultan as catamite. The Ottoman chronicler Dervish Ahmed (1400-1486) reported similar: "The Giauren (Christians) of Istanbul were turned into slaves and the pretty girls were taken from Gazi (Muslim holy warriors) in arms."

• 1463 A.D.: After the fall of Constantinople (May 29, 1453), the Turks began the conquest of Greece and expelled the Venetians from the Greek mainland.

• 1480 A.D.: a Muslim army conquered Otranto in Italy. 1481 reconquest a Christian army.

• 1499 A.D.: Internal disputes the Ottomans took Venice to acquire 1489 Cyprus. Despite the support of Spain, Portugal, France, the Papal States and the Johanniter Venice had to give up more Greek cities and pay tribute.

• 1521 A.D.: a Muslim army conquered Belgrade.

• 1522 A.D.: The Order of St. John (cf.. Knights Hospitaller) had settled in 1309 on the island of Rhodes and controlled from there the sea trade in the eastern Mediterranean. After a first unsuccessful siege in 1480 ended 26 June 1522 great Ottoman invasion army on the island to conquer dominion over the eastern Mediterranean for the Ottoman Empire. The up to 160,000 invaders faced few thousand defenders. After heavy fighting the Knights capitulated on 22 December and departed on 1 January 1523

• 1526 A.D.: Battle of Mohacs (Hungary). A Christian army is beaten by a Muslim army. Muslim armies conquered most of Hungary and threaten Vienna.

• 1529 A.D.: The first siege of Vienna by a Muslim army fails.

• 1565 A.D.: After 1522 the Turks had chased away the Order of Saint John from Rhodes, offered the Emperor Charles V to the Order the island of Malta as a new residence. Johanniter settled down in 1530 on the island. On May 18, 1565 40,000 Turks began to command Süleyman the Magnificent with the siege of Malta. The approximately 9,000 Teutonic Knights held the siege until the Ottomans had to break off the siege due to the imminent autumn storms on September 8, after losses of an estimated 20,000 man.

• 1566 A.D.: The occasion was an uprising of the Transylvanian prince Johann II. Sigismund Zápolya. 1566 came to a successful Ottoman siege of Szigetvár. In the first peace of Adrian Opel loss Szigetvárs was recognized, restored otherwise the status quo.

• 1569 A.D.: After the Russian conquest of Kazan and Astrakhan Khanate, the Ottoman Empire wanted to bring these former Muslim empires in the Volga area back into its sphere of influence and undertook together with the Crimean khanate a campaign against Astrakhan. In order to use the Ottoman fleet for troop transport, was begun with the construction of a canal between two tributaries of the Don and Volga. However, the siege was unsuccessful.

• 1570 A.D.: The Turks conquered Cyprus; Spain, the Papal States and Venice joined on 20 May 1571 together to the Holy League. Its fleet under Don Juan de Austria defeated the Turks on 7 October in 1571 in the Battle of Lepanto. Despite the victory, Venice concluded in 1573 a separate peace, renounced Cyprus and paid 300,000 ducats to the Ottoman Empire.

• 1593 A.D.: Defense War of the Austrian, founded by almost annual Turkish invasions; 1606 Peace of Zsitvatorok, the Emperor was recognized by the Sultan as an equal negotiating partner, one-time payment of 200,000 florins ended the annual tribute.

• 1620 A.D.: Polish attempts to gain influence in Transylvania and Moldova, led to the posting of an Ottoman army which was victorious at Tutora on Prut end 1620. The following year, led Sultan Osman II. personally an army to Moldova, which unsuccessfully besieged Chotyn. In the peace treaty Poland renounced his claims on Moldova.

• 1633 A.D.: After the death of the Polish King Sigismund III. Wasa, Russian troops attacked Poland-Lithuania. Mohammed Abazy, the Turkish Pasha of Vidin, saw his chance and also invaded Poland. The Polish Hetman Stanislaw Koniecpolski organized a rapid and vigorous defense and hit back the Ottomans.

• 1645 A.D.: The war took place mainly from Crete. After the Turks had begun on 24 June 1645 to conquer the island, they besieged from 1648 for 21 years, the heavily fortified, defended by mercenaries capital Candia (today's Heraklion) before it was conquered 1669.

• 1663 A.D.: After tensions in Transylvania, the Turks in 1663 began an offensive against Emperor Leopold I and conquered several fortresses in Upper Hungary (among others Neuhäusl). 1664, however, they were governed by the imperial troops in Levice and St. Gotthard an der Raab. The quickly following the Peace of Vasvár confirmed the status quo, including the Turkish possession of Neuhäusl.

• 1672 A.D.: The Cossacks in the Polish-dominated right bank Ukraine under the leadership of Hetman Doroshenko placed themselves under the protection of the Porte; which demanded that the cession of the territories of Poland; 1672 began the Ottoman Empire to war; after heavy defeats led Sobieski, the Poles on 11 November 1673 at the Battle of Khotyn victory; Sobieski was then the Polish King John III. Sobieski selected. The war ended after eventful successes in the Treaty of 1676, in the Podolia with Kamieniec Podolski and most of the right bank Ukraine the Ottoman Empire was awarded.

• 1676 A.D.: After the conquest of Podolia in the war against Poland the Ottomans wanted to extend their domination on the Ukraine east of the Dnieper. The Cossacks, especially from the left-bank Ukraine under Hetman Ivan Samoylovich allied with Russia and sold with their help the turks friendly Hetman Doroshenko from its capital Chihirin in the right bank Ukraine 1674. Doroshenko recaptured him loyal Cossack troops Chihirin 1676, but was shortly thereafter besieged by the Cossacks from the left-bank Ukraine and the Russians again and this time jailed. Then sent the Turkish Sultan Ibrahim Szejtan and Yuri Khmelnitsky as his vassal in the Ukraine in 1677 with a 120,000 strong army towards the left-bank Ukraine in March, which was defeated in a battle, however. 1678 renewed the Sultan his will to subdue the entire Ukraine and sent up to 200,000 troops under Kara Mustafa against about 120,000 Russians and Ukrainians in Chihirin. The Russian army broke out of the siege, cross the Dnepr and ward off further Turkish attacks. Finally, a peace agreement was signed, which confirmed the Dnepr as a border again.

• 1683 A.D.: The second siege of Vienna by a Muslim army fails. Europe therefore remains essentially Christian to the present.

• 1710 A.D.: After Peter I the Swedes under Charles XII. had defeated in the Battle of Poltava in 1709, these fled to the Ottoman Empire. The Russian troops occupied Bessarabia were, but included the Prut and capitulated on July 22 in the Treaty of the Pruth; Azov and parts of the Ukraine were again Ottoman, Karl could peel back.

• 1714 A.D.: First Venice lost 1715 Peloponnese; Croats held successfully Sinj; 1716 called for the Austrians, the return of the territory of Venice; on August 5, 1716 suggested Prinz Eugen the Ottomans at the Battle of Petrovaradin, 1717 he conquered Belgrade; in peace Passarowitz from July 21, 1718 Austria received Belgrade and some other areas; Venice no longer participated from now on the Turkish wars.

• 1736 A.D.: War Austria to conquer Bosnia; Wins the Turks in Serbia; 1735 Crimea was devastated by the Russians; 1737 Bessarabia was occupied by Russia; on September 18, 1739 Peace of Belgrade, Austria lost the conquests of the last war again, Russia was unable to enforce the desired right to free passage for its ships on the Azov and Black Sea. Despite a 1738 closed alliance with the Ottomans Sweden remained neutral at first; only after the conclusion of peace it attacked the Russians and therefore hoped in the war over Finland in vain for a two-front war. However, France received 1740 additional privileges (capitulations) for his successful military aid against the Austrians.

• 1768 A.D.: In the Polish Civil War, the Turks have been called by the Confederation of Bar to help Russia occupied Moldavia and Wallachia, 1770 the Turkish fleet in the port of Çesme was destroyed by the Russian, 1774 victory of the Russians at Shumla; July 21, 1774 Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca, the southern Ukraine with the mouths of Bug, Dnieper and Don came to Russia, the Crimea became independent and annexed in 1783 by Russia, Russian ships were allowed to pass through the Straits, Russia received protectorate rights over Orthodox in the Ottoman Empire , first partition of Poland.

• 1787 A.D.: War to divide the Ottoman Empire, August 24, 1787 declaration of war of Turkey in Russia, February 9, 1788 entry into the war of Austria, 1789 Austrians conquered Belgrade and Bucharest, Russians occupied the Principality of Moldova, 1790 Austrian victory at Kalafat, a 1790 against Russia and Austria closed Ottoman-Prussian alliance forced Emperor Leopold II on August 4, 1791 peace of Sistova with the Sultan. January 9, 1792 Treaty of Jassy, Dnepr was border between Russia and the Ottoman Empire; Austria took distance from the plan to destroy the Ottoman Empire, since it was more and more in competition with Russia; Prussia gave Russia a free hand to the second partition of Poland; 1787 took Catherine II. An inspection tour to the newly conquered Crimea

• 1798 A.D.: Formally, to restore the authority of the Sultan and to rid the country of feudal Mameluke rule, the French Republic occupied in contrast to the traditional alliance policy of the kingdom under Napoleon Egypt. The Ottoman Empire joined under pressure from the British fleet off Istanbul in 1799 an alliance with Great Britain and the multiple-war Russia, a French advance into Syria failed before Akko the Turkish-British resistance. A full British-Turkish reconquest of Egypt failed despite battles with Aboukir before Anglo-French peace treaty of Amiens 1802.

• 1806 A.D.: The Serbian uprising of 1804 came to Russia help, it occupied the principality of Moldavia and Wallachia; on 28 May 1812 had to close Russia peace of Bucharest in order to focus on the expected attack of Napoleon. Russia received Bessarabia, the Prut, the new border between the two kingdoms; 1813 Serbia was conquered by the Turks again, the South Slavs, in their quest for independence, translated from now on Russia and not on Austria.

• 1828 A.D.: Encouraged by the Serbian Uprising, also rose the Greeks in 1821; Russia occupied Moldavia and Wallachia in 1829 the Russians crossed the first time the Balkan Mountains; September 14, 1829 Second Peace of Adrian Opel; Russia received territories south of the Caucasus; Moldova, Wallachia and Serbia became autonomous and came under Russian influence, the Straits were free for all ships.

• 1853 A.D.: The demand of the Russian Tsar Nicholas I on a protectorate for its Orthodox brethren in the Ottoman Empire has been rejected by the Sublime Porte, Russia occupied the principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia; Britain and France supported the Turks and conquered the Crimean Sevastopol; the Treaty of Paris March 30, 1856 came Moldavia and Wallachia under a protectorate of the Western powers, Southern Bessarabia fell to the Vltava River, the Danube was internationalized, demilitarized the Black Sea; the internal crisis in Russia came to the fore and leading to reforms, including the abolition of serfdom.

• 1877 A.D.: After the defeat of Serbia in the Serbian-Turkish War (1876-1878) Russian troops led away to war, in the meantime to Romania federated former principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia occupied again, conquered Pleven and stood in front of Constantinople, on 3 March 1878 as it peace San Stefano came: The Ottoman Empire had to bend a favorable for Russia dictated peace. Since this increase in power the great powers Austria-Hungary, Britain and France went too far, the Balkans was divided again at the Berlin Congress on July 13: Romania, Serbia and Montenegro became independent, Bulgaria received a special status, but remained the Ottoman Empire against tributary , Austria-Hungary was allowed Bosnia and Herzegovina occupy, UK received Cyprus while Raszien, Albania, Macedonia and Rumelia the Ottoman Empire remained.

• 1969 A.D.: Nations illegal annexation of West Papua (the western half of New Guinea island) by the Islamic Indonesia, followed by forcible and serious human rights violations against Christian aborigines to today, and tolerated by the UN. Renaming the country in Irian Jaya ("Victorious Irian")

If I take a look at the above list then I see how peaceful the Islam is. In such a case I don't like to know what the Muslims are understanding under the word war.

Has anybody seen an Islamic missionary? I mean a real one without guns and bombs. I think it would not make any sense because everybody who has all his senses together would not submit himself voluntarily into a totalitarian religious dictatorship.