Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

[abandonconflict]

http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=9&verse=29

All seven translations say the same thing. Here are the first three.

Sahih International: Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

Pickthall: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.

Yusuf Ali: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

You're a hopeless dumbass. 9:29 referred to a specific defensive battle against a specific army of invading Christian invaders and yet commanded the army of the caliphate to be merciful and accept surrender.

 

[UncleBuck]

AC, and the other RIU leftie nuts certainly won't extend the same consideration to "Rednecks", "HillBillies", and other ignorant whiteys. They sure go out of their way to defend Muhammad and his illiterate followers, though. I wonder why that is?

are you sad that we don't celebrate and defend your white supremacy beliefs?

so sad, go cry.

 

[ginwilly]

So you haven't read the book, but you thought that maybe it seemed at first like I didn't get it, when I have actually read it. Because your doctor is Muslim. When did I ever deny that there are extremist Muslims? Who do you think I fought against in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Where people go wrong, is thinking they know what a book says, with out reading the book.

I've read an English conversion, I have no idea of the accuracy since I don't speak the original language it's written and read in. I would never pretend to be an expert though just because I read some of the passages. People learn the lessons over years of schooling from what I understand.

No way I would try to present myself as an authority on a religion I'm not part of just because I've read a book. That just seems arrogant to me. I'll take the word of someone who actually grew up and lives the religion over my own interpretation of what I've read. The problem is, there are many interpretations. I happen to like his, so I'm going with it.

I also play golf with the dude and consider him a friend. Another of our 4some is devout Baptist and I try to listen to their conversations, it's fascinating to me. No, I don't take their word as end all be all, but no way would I pretend to know more than either of them about their religion because I read a book.

 

[UncleBuck]

I would never pretend to be an expert though just because I read some of the passage...No way I would try to present myself as an authority on a religion I'm not part of just because I've read a book.

....So yeah, holy books (pick a book any book) give some nutjobs justification for a lot of bad stuff.

 

[abandonconflict]

The quran doesn't command Muslim people to commit violence in general against non-Muslims. There are a few contextual verses where Muslim armies are commanded to fight oppressors and invaders, but the book is absolutely not the source of terrorism.

 

[panhead]

Except what you described was vastly inaccurate.

Wrong , what i posted was accurate & i have read the quran from cover to cover as well as both testaments, ive also read the pagan bible & the satanic bible, im not educated but i am well read allthough i do admit to not reading all 6 books of hadith .

Gabriel spoke gods words to muhammad over a 30 year period , this chronology is not followed in the quran , the verses within the quran also do not follow chronological order , the chapters within the quran are laid out in the form of the largest chapter to the shortest chapter , whats vastly innacurate about that ?

Millions of people accept the abridged versions of the Christian bible but for some reason you discredit the validity of the abridged quran , why ?

 

[abandonconflict]

Heres a quick explaination of Islam for you .

If an extremist read the quaran in its true form , then followed its revelations to the letter he has no choice but to act with violence against the Kaafir , the labels Infidel , Kaafir & Kuffer represent 3 different groups of people in the quran with the Kaafir being the most loathed because he has been given the words of Islam , he understands the laws of Islam & he rejects Islam , another person who is a Kaafir is anybody who has taken up arms against Islam ,Kaafirs have no chance to repent & are supposed to be killed immediately, Infidels are non believers & are given 3 days to reflect on their blasphemy before death or imprisonment occurs, a Kuffer is a Jew , a Christian or anybody who believes in the holy trinity , infact over 60% of the quran speaks about how a muslim should deal with or interact with non believers of Islam ,early revelations in the quran speak of peace & acceptance of jews & christians while later revelations speak of shunning & violence twords the Kaafir , well thats great because all the people who swear Islam is a peacefull religion conveniently leave out one very important issue which is Abrogation .

Abrogation is the interpretation of conflicting verses in the quran where one verse seeks the approval & acceptance of the jews & christians while another verse condems the jews & christians then urges war against them , Abrogation rules that the verse laid out 1st chronologically ( Not as laid out in the qurans non linear form ) will be cancelled out by any chronologically later verses covering the same subject .

In the chronological timeline of the quran Mohammad calls for peace with other religions in the beginning , the further along chronologically the more violent Mohammad becomes when explaining on how to interact with Kaafirs , Infidels & Kuufers , the quran is a non linear book with its chapters laid out in non linear form & follows no real timeline .

The quran is a long confusing read because its out of chronological time frame & talks about situations & the same people dozens of times , i think Moses is covered like 20 times & saying the same stuff each time he's spoken about, if you want to understand the quran you can buy a condensed version which deletes the hundreds of pages speaking about the same people like Moses & Pharrow , it also puts the quran in a linear chronological time line making it much easier to understand Mohammeds words in how Muslims are urged to interact with all 3 groups of undesirables spoken of in the quran .

The most important thing when buying a quran is to buy a revised version which puts chapters & verses in their true chronological order , read that then you can argue Islam with these guys till the cows come home .

This garbage.

 

[panhead]

This garbage.

Meaning exactly what , show me the exact inaccuracies.

This garbage is a shock value comment of no value .

 

[desert dude]

The real point is this: The Quran might be a peaceful book, filled with nothing but love, but if a few million Muslims believe it commands them to kill infidels, then we all have a problem.

Just as an example, there is fairly significant support in Europe for ISIS: 18% in France, for example.

 

[abandonconflict]

Meaning exactly what , show me the exact inaccuracies.

This garbage is a shock value comment of no value .

The only verses which command violence are contextual. 9:29 for example refers to a specific defensive battle against the invading Christian army of the Eastern Roman Empire. By taking 9:29 out of this context, people are arguing that the Quran commands violence against non-Muslims in general.

Your post was garbage because of the assertion that it is worthwhile to read a version of a book with vast portions omitted.

 

[abandonconflict]

The real point is this: The Quran might be a peaceful book

Actually dumbass (do you mind if I call you dumbass?) you have been trying your damndest to make it out to be the source of terrorism.

 

[TBoneJack]

sound it out, alabamaredneck.

Hey Buck, just FYI, do you remember a couple or three weeks ago when your (supposed) Facebook picture was posted here in the Politics section? Guess who reported it to moderators (loosely quoting my report to them):

"Spam post trying to reveal the identity of a member".

Yes, it was me who reported that post to moderators. Just ask them. Someone may have reported it before me, but I definitely reported it.

So don't ever call me a fucking snitch.

 

[ginwilly]

Actually dumbass (do you mind if I call you dumbass?) you have been trying your damndest to make it out to be the source of terrorism.

For some it is, it's OK to admit this. There are leaders who use it as a recruiting tool too to the uneducated poor and desperate. Those 72 virgins are a helluva incentive to some. You act as though admitting this would be the same as saying all Muslims think X. It's not.

 

[panhead]

The quran doesn't command Muslim people to commit violence in general against non-Muslims. There are a few contextual verses where Muslim armies are commanded to fight oppressors and invaders, but the book is absolutely not the source of terrorism.

What is the source of ages of secular wars & hatred amongst muslims twords other muslims ?

 

[TBoneJack]

Actually dumbass (do you mind if I call you dumbass?) you have been trying your damndest to make it out to be the source of terrorism.

I mind if you call him dumbass. And in this age of "we can't offend anyone", you should apologize to DD and become determined to be politically correct from now on.

 

[UncleBuck]

The real point is this: The Quran might be a peaceful book, filled with nothing but love, but if a few million Muslims believe it commands them to kill infidels, then we all have a problem.

Just as an example, there is fairly significant support in Europe for ISIS: 18% in France, for example.

the support for the iraq war amongst republican males, a war started by a born again christian who thought that god talked to him personally, was 72%.

that war left half a million iraqi civilians dead.

no one cares what you have to say, you're a white supremacist rat.

 

[UncleBuck]

Hey Buck, just FYI, do you remember a couple or three weeks ago when your (supposed) Facebook picture was posted here in the Politics section? Guess who reported it to moderators (loosely quoting my report to them):

"Spam post trying to reveal the identity of a member".

Yes, it was me who reported that post to moderators. Just ask them. Someone may have reported it before me, but I definitely reported it.

So don't ever call me a fucking snitch.

i have posted a picture of myself on this website which is also on facebook. i don't really care, no one is going after growers in legal states who grow a couple pounds a month.

so thanks for nothing, alabamaredneck.

 

[UncleBuck]

For some it is, it's OK to admit this. There are leaders who use it as a recruiting tool too to the uneducated poor and desperate. Those 72 virgins are a helluva incentive to some. You act as though admitting this would be the same as saying all Muslims think X. It's not.

there is no mention of 72 virgins in the koran, dumbass.

 

[UncleBuck]

I mind if you call him dumbass. And in this age of "we can't offend anyone", you should apologize to DD and become determined to be politically correct from now on.

dumbass is the politically correct way to refer to a white supremacist rat like desert dude though.

 

[TBoneJack]

i have posted a picture of myself on this website which is also on facebook. i don't really care, no one is going after growers in legal states who grow a couple pounds a month.

so thanks for nothing, alabamaredneck.

Whether you were in danger or not, the fact is that I had your back. And you should be thankful and courteous.