JIHAD - «HOLY WAR», THOUGH TOO OFTEN UNHOLY WAR (for riches, booty, rape, slaves, power and spreading Islam by compulsions like weapons, suppression, "berufsverbot" ("no good jobs for you"), social stigma, pogroms, etc., etc.) - IN THE QURAN, IN HADITHS, AND IN ISLAM. A DUTY FOR ALL MUSLIMS THEN, NOW AND FOREVER - AND THE EASY WAY TO PARADISE

1000+ Comments, claims about the duty of war - and the easy way to Paradise - etc. in the war religion Islam. (Comments from Hadiths will be added in 2010 AD).

Comments in this book numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small letter = clear cases. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or small) = likely cases.

PART III: THE KILLINGS, RAIDS, AND WARS - MAINLY FOR STEALING, BOOTY, RAPE, ENSLAVING AND POWER, IN THE QURAN, THE HOLY BOOK OF MUHAMMAD, MUSLIMS, ALLAH, AND ISLAM, "THE RELIGION OF PEACE"

Chapter 10

188 QUOTES ON JIHAD FROM THE QURAN AND "THE RELIGION OF PEACE".

Like the OT in the Bible, but unlike the NT (where the commandment is: You shall not kill), war is an integrated part of the Quran - hardly anything during the Mecca (first) period, but far more than sufficient in the Medina years. There are two distinct differences, though, between also the OT and the Quran:

1. ONE: In the Quran war for Islam in many cases is (and always is decleared to be) a holy duty - jihad - to wage war and to kill for Allah and for Muhammad (and his successors). In OT it is simply historical facts that it happened like that and that the idea was to make space for Israel - included that Yahweh gave orders and some places was not satisfied with that Israel did not kill or evict enough of the people that lived in the country before the Jews (we know this name in reality is younger) arrived, because this would cause troubles later, he said - - - which it did, according to the Bible.

   There is one presumably strict limit to jihad: It can only be declared for a war in self-defence. What Muslims do not often mention, is that “this is to be understood in the widest meaning of the word” to quote “The Message of the Quran” - - - and that even this small reservation frequently was “overlooked” in wars of conquest. This makes this often touted limit meaningless - nearly anything can be defined as “self defence” when you go for “the widest meaning of the word” - especially when fanatics themselves decide what is to be reckoned as an attack (mainly anything they themselves dislike or disagree with - no matter if it is true or not) and who are guilty (f. ex. “anyone in the west (and other non-Muslim countries in at least slightly opposition to Muslims), because they pay tax and thus help to finance the “war” against Islam“, is a definition used by fanatics and terrorists - no matter that it is not possible for most people in most countries not to pay tax if you at all make a somewhat normal living.). In the hands and minds of fanatics there hardly is any limitation - which is proved by the situation many places today. Remember f. ex. that the Quran says that murder/war is better (for Islam) than suppression. If some fanatics in London or Amsterdam or Oslo or Copenhagen or Paris or Madrid or Moscow or in any town in my dear Germany - or for that case here in Cairo (2007 AD) or in Algeria or Casablanca - think that Muslims there in some ways are suppressed, or they simply want to “resist against the attacking West”, or “infidels should not rule over Muslims - politically or at work” (there have been many an “intifada” in Muslim countries through the centuries because a non-Muslim got a job with Muslim underlings), that is good and valid reason for “jihad”. As we have seen time and again. (All the 4 Islamic law schools also accepted that if the opponents were non-Muslims, that was reason enought to declare jihad - holy war. Not until in the 1920's - 1930's this rule was even questioned).

2. TWO: In the Bible it is told about wars 2000 to 4000 years ago. In the Quran it is not only told about old wars, but given strong incitement to and strict orders that to wage war for the belief often is a holy duty - and a sure way to a Paradise with lots of Earth-like luxury and lots of wonderful houries - in the old time, now, and in all future till Islam is the dominant religion, and all non-Muslims are suppressed and powerless underlings obeying Muslim regimes and paying extra taxes. AND THIS IS THE POINT OF VIEW ALSO TODAY IN WIDE MUSLIM RELIGIOUS CIRCLES - JUST READ MODERN RELIGIOUS LITERATUR MEANT FOR MUSLIMS, AND YOU SEE THIS.

It is said that Islam is a religion for peace. That may be true among Muslims, though history has shown - and shows today - that it is easy for Muslim leaders to start even a holy war against other Muslims. It just is to declare that the enemies are not real Muslims of the correct belief any more - and of course it is “our” side that represents the correct belief.

As for Muslims and “infidels” it is a most open question - some would say a sure thing, not open - how peaceful or not Islam is towards non-Muslims in Muslim societies and countries.

But remember that also Muslims are humans. Most of them just want to live in peace and quiet with their family and friends and neighbours, and want no war at all.

On the other hand terrorists do not have to disuse the Quran to find verses telling them to fight and kill non-Muslims - - - in a way it is easy to see why some terrorists say peaceful Muslims are wrong. This even more so, as not all verses in the Quran are reckoned to have the same value - some even are reckoned to be without value, when younger verses say something else. There are contradicting points in the Quran - Allah has had to change his mind some times - and the general rule in Islam then is that the youngest verse is what counts. Because of this, we include the year (AD) when Muhammad told the surahs, if the year is known (in many cases the year is approximately only). But beware that in some cases not all the verses in a surah are of the same age - it can vary wildly, as the verses “came down” a few at a time, and not necessarily were put together in chronological order. We also may mention that surahs from the early period (in Mecca, from where he fled to Yathrib, later named Medina, in 622 AD) tends (to say the least of it) to be milder than later ones in Medina where Muhammad quickly became more powerful and strongly tended to be harder and more warlike. Muhammad and his followers there lived as highway-men and as a robber baron and his men.

The first number is year, as said, followed by the surah and the surah number - these are in a separate line on top. Then follows the number of the quote in this chapter, whereas 000 refers to fighting of no concerns to Muslims. Finally follows the surah and verse numbers from the Quran in Yusuf Ali‘s translation to English.

Year 611-614 AD, Surah 73.

001 73/20: “He (Allah*) knoweth that there may be (some) among you - - - fighting in Allah’s cause”. This is the only mentioning of fighting up to around 616 AD, in a period where Muhammad had brought nearly 50 - fifty - surahs, not one of which even mention the word fighting. And as is shown below there is no other unmistakeable mentioning of fighting in all the 12 years before Muhammad had to flee to Yathrib (now Medina) - and even this verse may simply mean mental fighting by means of words and deeds, not by means of the sword. This in spite of how central the war for Allah and for Muhammad became. Did Allah change his mind after some years? Or was it Muhammad who changed as he gained power? This early Muhammad did not have enough followers to really fight with weapons. But in case it at this time only meant fighting with words it is even more strange that Allah later so totally changed his mind, from a peaceful religion to one of war and teaching hate with so much stress on the duty to fight and die for Allah and Muhammad. If he was omniscient, he should from the very beginning have known what a gift it was to Allah that humans fought and killed each others in reverence to him - not to mention how unfair it was not to tell his first followers about this sure way to Paradise and the houries, etc., and deny them this easy way to the Next Life. Not to mention how unfair it was against the bad ones of his followers not to tell them that they really had a chance to come to Paradise: Be killed in war for Allah, and everything was forgiven, nearly no matter how bad a man you had been. But the really great mystery is: Why did and does an omnipotent god need humans to fight for him? There is no logic in this claim. (But there is a logic if Muhammad wanted them to fight for himself.)

Year 616 AD approximately (except verse 39 – 48 = 622 or 623 AD), surah 22.

002 22/39: “To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged”. Remark the difference in the restricted wording here on the transition (remember this verse is from 622 or 623 AD) between the rather peaceful Mecca period and the bloody and inhuman Medina period afterwards.

003 22/78: “And strive in His cause as ye ought to strive, (with sincerity and under discipline)”. The word “strive” frequently is used as a synonym for “fight”, but in this case it is unclear if it is meant “fight” or mental striving to get more Muslims or “work hard”. This early may be it means “work hard”, as the religion was quite peaceful till 622 AD.

Year 622 AD or later, surah 17.

000 17/5: “- - - We (Allah*) sent against you (the Jews*) Our servants (attackers from the east*) given to terrible warfare - - -”. Israel was attacked some times during the time of OT but for natural reasons no Muslim was involved (1000 years and more too early).

Year 622 AD Mecca, surah 16.

0004 16/110. “But verily thy Lord - to those who leave their homes after trials and persecutions - and thereafter strive for the Faith and patiently persevere - thy Lord, after all this is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” Comments; see 22/78. We may add that this one is written shortly before the Muslims had to flee from Mecca - perhaps even after the first ones had fled to East Africa (Ethiopia). The Muslims are told that Allah will be good to the ones who have to flee for Allah.

Year unknown, likely Mecca, surah 100.

005 100/5: Age unknown but likely Mecca. At least the 6 first verses (all the part we quote) is an oath, not talk about war. Verses or parts of a surah in the Quran starting with “by” means the following text is an oath or quotation of an oath - Allah or Muhammad swears by something - in this case by the magnificent war horses the Arabs had plenty of for use in all the wars and fighting between tribes. “By the (Steeds) that run, with panting (breath), And strike sparks of fire, And push home the charge in the morning, And raise the dust in clouds the while, And penetrate forthwith into the midst (of the foe) en masse - Truly Man is, to his Lord (Allah*), ungrateful - - -” This verse is not about war, but about the ungrateful men – or perhaps about war all the same (Muslim scholars say no)? – or about the unruly inner self of man? – but anyhow: Allah or Muhammad swears by the respected war horses that man is ungrateful to Allah.

Now we have reached the time of Muhammad’s flight from Mecca. In the 12 years of his religious work in Mecca between 85 and 90 Surahs are (perhaps 86) told by Muhammad - presumed to be quoted from the arch angle Gabriel (some are said to be received directly and some in dreams). And remember that the Quran only has 114 surahs - there are just some 25-30 (exact numbers are not known, as one does not know the age of some surahs) left for the 10 years in Medina - though among these are a number of the longest ones. May be some 22 in Medina, and then some of unknown age.

You will find that Muhammad and his teachings were much milder in Mecca, than later in Medina - may be because in Mecca he was the underdog, whereas in Medina in a short time he gained power and the upper hand (power corrupts, a proverb says). But few tell how great and terrible the change was - hate, suppression, blood, and war soon became an integrated part of the religion. And to be killed for Allah/Muhammad became at least as strong a sacrament (to use a Christian word) as the “last oil” in Catholicism - at least.

In Medina the Muslims were in a desperate situation - they had nothing to live from. Even if they got a lot of help and some work from the locals, they HAD to make a living in some way. And Muhammad turned to robbery and became the boss of a group of highwaymen living from attaching peaceful businessmen mainly from the rich Mecca and their caravans. (Muslims like to tell this was because there was a war between Mecca and Medina. This is flatly wrong - and the reason why we do not call it a lie, is that some Muslims really believe it. It really was the other way round: The war started because of the robberies - without the robberies Macca had happily left him and his small group alone.

For the highway activities Muhammad needed warriors - not to mention he needed them later when Mecca attacked to make an end to the robberies, and even more so when Muhammad started attacking his surroundings firstly to secure his life in Medina and to gain riches and power, and then to attack people further away to gain more power and slaves and wealth and to spread his teaching to gain more power. Muslims like to pretend that they did not force Islam on anyone. That is not true. Even this early they behaved very inhuman against pagans, even pagan Arabs - and sometimes also against the “people of the book”, in this case mainly Jews. Pagans mostly were given the choices: Become Muslims, become slaves or die. The same frequently were the choices for all other pagans they met on their war paths - and sometimes also for the Peoples of the Book (Christians, Jews and Sabians - the last ones were Christians living in approximately what is now Yemen, and who had become Christians via the then Christian Egypt and Ethiopia - though Islam also has other explanations for whom the Sabians were) who were granted special status in the Quran.

Up till then the teachings of Muhammad had been relatively mild and far from warlike. In the 85-90 (perhaps 86) surahs from the Mecca period there is almost no talk about fighting, and not one single verse talking for sure about fighting with weapons. Neither is there one single mentioning of waging war for Allah (or for Muhammad, which is the same thing), not to mention the duty of doing so. There is not even a single mentioning of the “fact” that being killed for Allah/Muhammad was a sure way to Paradise with lots of earth-like luxury and women, nearly no matter what kind of rascal you were. If Allah knew this earlier, he was quite unjust towards his early followers not telling them this.

As you will see, this now changes totally over a short time.

Whether the reason for this is that Allah found he had not been right - or changed his omniscient mind - or if it was Muhammad who changed something, is not for us to say, as final proofs are impossible to find when you may be deal with the supernatural. But some circumstances may point in a special direction.

What is absolutely sure, is that Muhammad found himself a very cheap way of recruiting warriors - promises of payment - luxury and women - in the next life, cost no gold and no money. It also of course helped that Allah not only promised Paradise, but told it was just to steal and rob and take slaves (20% for Muhammad - though not all for personal use) - not to mention that the good and kind god Allah very clearly stated ok for raping any non-Muslim not pregnant girl or woman (a praxis you see even today - f. ex. during the war between Pakistan and Bangladesh a generation ago, not to mention Darfur now). The promise of big riches to steal and women to rape and keep as slaves also made special kinds of men fierce warriors - the first one to grab something often was the new owner. And the promise of a glorious Next Life helped + it made also other kinds of men fierce warriors - or terrorists today.

But the deep and serious question you NEVER hear Muslims discuss is: Who changed his mind - Allah or Muhammad? And the as fundamental question: If it was Allah who changed his mind: Why did not he - a presumably omniscient god - know before that war and hate was a good thing? - and that being killed for Muhammad and Allah was a sure way not only to Paradise, but also to the better parts of Paradise? (Yes, some parts of the Muslim Paradise are better than the rest).

If we understand Ibn Ishaq (the first and best Muslim biography about Muslim), Muhammad personally lead at least these raids:

1. The raid on Waddan (his first raid according to Ibn Ishaq).
2. The raid on Buwat.
3. The raid on al-Ushayra (Quraysh)
4. The first raid on Badr.
5. The raid on the caravan (that became the second raid on - and the battle of - Badr).
6. The raid on B. Sulayman in al-Kudr.
7. The raid on al-Sawiq
8. The raid on Najd. (Dhu Amarr).
9. The raid on Bahran near Al-Furu (Quraysh)
10. The raid of Dhatu`l-Riqa.
11. The raid of Dumatu`l-Jandal (in 627 AD).
12. The raid on B. Lihyan.
13. The raid on B. Mustaliq.

Also see Part XI, chapters 12 and 13 about more raids, etc.

There were more (like Khaybar), but Muhammad’s position slowly changed from a thief, highwayman, and extorter, to a warlord - doing the same things, but on a grander scale.

This should mean he personally lead something like a dozen raids. Another of our sources says “at least 3 raids” (the first one seems to be more correct than the second one - and even that number seems too low), but more about this in chapters XI/12 and XI/13.

To continue we mention that surah 47 or surah 2 most likely is the first surah Muhammad dictated in Medina (it is likely that 47 was partly from Medina, whereas 2 was the firse complete in that town) closely followed by surah 3 (may be really no. 2 in Medina). You will see a most sudden and most striking difference - Allah certainly changes his mind “in a wink”. In 2 years or something like that Islam had changed from something peaceful to a fullfledged war religion.

Year 616 AD approximately (except verse 39 – 48 = 622 or 623 AD), surah 22.

006 22/39 (622 or 623 AD): “To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged”. Remark the difference in the wording here on the transition between the rather peaceful Mecca period and the bloody and inhuman Medina period afterwards.

According to Islam this is the first time the theme war for Muslims is mentioned in the Quran.

007 22/40 (622 or 623 AD): “Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, synagogues, and mosques - - -“. He is not adverse to fighting and war – but not as inhuman, immoral and bloody as later. Also see 22/39 just above. (Scientists believe his success and power destroyed him morally – not an unusual phenomenon for absolute dictators and others).

Year ca. 621 – 624 AD. Surah 29:

008 29/6: “And if any strive for (with might and main (an expression that in the Quran normally means fight in war*)), they do so for their own souls - - -“. If you go to war, you gain merit with Allah.

009 29/69: “And those who strive in Our (Allah’s*) (Cause) – We will certainly guide them to Our Path - - -“. See 29/6 above.

Year 622 AD Medina, surah 47 .

*010 47/4a: “- - - when ye meet the unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; at length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (it is time for) either generosity or ransom (often the real choices were ransom or slavery - or sometimes execution*) - - -. Thus (are ye commanded) - - -”. As we said: A brutal transformation of the religion most suddenly.

011 47/4b: “But those who are slain in the way of Allah - He (Allah*) will never let their deeds be lost.” This may be the first ever mentioning of being killed for Allah/Muhammad. The promise of reward still is vague. One possible reason may be that Allah - or Muhammad - has not yet seen what will be the best - and most alluring (?) - ideas.

012 47/5: “Soon will He (Allah*) guide them (Muslims slain for Allah*) and improve their conditions, And admit them to the Garden which He has announced for them”. As we said; vague promises - it can of course be no less than Paradise, but you will find much more epic - and lyric - descriptions not much later. Allah quickly had found a good receipt - or perhaps Muhammad found it (Muhammad was intelligent and understood people - do not underrate him).

013 47/7: “O ye who believe! If ye will aid (from the context it is clear it means in war*) (the cause of) Allah, He will aid you, and plant your feet firmly.” Strengthening the morality of his warriors.

014 47/20: “But when a surah of basic or categorical meaning is revealed, and fighting is mentioned therein, thou wilt see those in whose heart is a disease looking at thee with the look of one in swoon at the approach of death.” A mark of the ones not liking to fight was that they were sick - had a disease in their heart.

015 47/21: “- - - it were best for them (the ones “in whose hearts is a disease*) if they were true (were willing to fight*) to Allah”. Soft - or may be not so soft - pressure on the reluctant ones to go to war when Muhammad said so.

Year 622-624 AD, surah 2 .

016 2/190: “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors”. This may be seen as order to fight in self-defence, and to be not too inhuman in war. The questions may be: Who defines the limits? And who defines what to call self-defence? Terrorists use the word “attack” for everything, and when Muslim interests are “attacked”, terror is self-defence. Also Islam says that the expression is to be “understood in the widest meaning of the word (f. ex. “The Message of the Quran”) - which is very wide and covers almost any excuse to go to war - - - and to call that war jihad (holy war). Words are very cheap, and it is possible to call anything Muslims do not like, or at least what they dislike, “an attack on Islam”. Not to mention how little it takes to call it an attack or an insult against Muhammad, which is even worse (because Muhammad is the weak link in Islam, and not the slightest doubt can stick to him - then the very foundations of Islam crumbles. This because all the religion rests on only one presumption: That Muhammad was perfect in everything, and consequently that everything he said and did was true. But the real Muhammad far from was a reliable man.)

**017 2/191a: “And slay them (the non-Muslims*) wherever ye catch them - - -”. A straight, no-nonsense order - not to be misunderstood. Very good words for terrorists.

018 2/191b: “- - - and turn them (the ones that fights you - it is not said who are the initial attackers*) out from where they have turned you out - - -”. A sentence ordering revenge or to retake what is lost to the enemy before - it may be a dilemma for f. ex. Greece, Balkan and Spain, which for centuries were under Islam. And a good verse for f. ex. terrorists in Spain (but also for others).

*019 2/191c: “- - - tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter; - - -” - but only oppression of Muslims (non-Muslims should and shall be oppressed and subdued - - - by Muslims). It is better to kill the non-Muslims than to live suppressed by them - even though the Quran clearly states that in Muslim states the non-Muslim of course have to accept suppression, lack of power of all kinds, and to pay extra and often heavy head tax - jizya. But then the Quran as clearly states that Muslims are better beings than non-Muslims. (See separate chapter).

There also is the question of who defines what is suppression.

020 2/191d: “- - - fight them (non-Muslims - in this case originally the old regime that still ruled in Mecca most likely*) not at the Sacred Mosque (Kabah*), unless they (first) fight you there, but if they fight you there, slay them.” Even at sacred ground it is just to kill. Of course if there really is no way to calm down a situation, what has to be done has to be done. But as a general order as the only answer to use, it tells something about Islam.

Honest words for your money.

*021 2/191e: “- - - such is the reward (to be killed*) for those (non-Muslims*) who suppress faith (Islam*)”. Honest words - and sugar for terrorists, especially as the terrorists themselves decide who are suppressors “in the widest meaning of the word”. Anyone who tells you the Quran has to be disused to incite to hate, war and terrorism - tell them to read the book just once (but without religious or political blindness). Strictly speaking: It is the ones who do not want war - included terrorism - who are wrong according to the Quran.

022 2/195: “And spend of your substance in the cause of Allah, - - - “. This may or may not mean: Give money to the war for Islam. It is likely that it means this, as the same text translated from a Swedish Quran (NB: Certified by Al-Azahr Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy, Cairo) reads: “Give to (the fight for) the cause of Allah”. (It is no secret that many - very many - Muslims give money and help to such fight, included to terrorist organisations.)

023 2/207: “And there is the type of man who gives his life to earn the pleasure of Allah; and Allah is full of kindness to (His) devotees”. The ideal way of living is to die for Allah/Muhammad.

And at the same time Muhammad and any later Muslim leaders or terrorist leaders have a cheap, ferocious fighter.

**024 2/216a: “Fighting is prescribed for you - - -”. Not possible to misunderstand. Muhammad (and his successors) needed warriors, and the good god and the religion ordered the “believers” to go to war. A most good verse for terrorist leaders and some others - f. ex. terrorists. Is there anyone who said one had to disuse the Quran to start fighting and killing?

025 2/216b: “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it.” Still not possible to understand: You should go to war when Muhammad calls you, whether you like it or not.

026 2//216c: “- - - But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you (to fight in war*), and that you love a thing (peace*) that is bad for you.” No comments except a question: Did you ever meet a person telling that Islam is a peaceful religion?

027 2/217a: “Fighting therein (in holy months - the old Arabs had 4 holy months a year in which fighting and war was prohibited and a grave sin*) is a grave (offence); but graver is it in the sight of Allah to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque - - -”. Muhammad’s highwaymen had attacked and plundered a caravan from Mecca during a holy month and Muhammad received a storm of critic. But his/Allah’s reply was that as Mecca denied the Muslims access to the Kabah (this was before Muhammad had taken Mecca), they were bad people. And then even a grave sin made by Muhammad was no sin. Convenient. Read by a terrorist today: Whatever you do against someone not obeying Islam - or worse; oppose it - is no sin.

This logic that seems ok on the surface, but which is deeply wrong, you often meet: "What I do wrong is not wrong if also you do something wrong". But what you do wrong, is as wrong no matter what good or bad things your opponent does - and this even more so if you pretend to represent a benevolent god. (Another thing is that it may be easier to defend your own bad behaviour, if you can blame the opponent for something - but your own bad deeds are just as bad all the same).

Verse 216 and 217 tell that very few things are holy if the interests of Muhammad/Islam can be strengthened.

And a question: The holy months were a pure Arab tradition which Islam took over. How come that an universal god - at least for whole Earth - so often found traditions from the heathen Arabia to be just what he wanted, and not too often had ideas himself - not to mention nearly never found good ideas from other places in the world except from Arabia and its neighbours? - f. ex. also the traditions of Hajj and the traditional celebrations around Kabah is practically identical to the superficial and honestly pretty childish traditions from before Islam.

*028 2/217b: “Tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter”. Unrest and oppression against the Muslims are no good - it is better that the Muslims in case kill the opponents (in this case it was about the old regime in Mecca - still not overrun - but other verses in the Quran make the order general. See the first comment under 2/191). Nice “food” for terrorists - the West is suppressing Muslims they say, and as everybody there pay taxes (not true - and the ones that do, have to) to their Islam-suppressing regimes, everybody is guilty, and deserves to be killed.

029 2/218: “- - - those (Muslims*) who suffered exile and fought (and strove and struggled) in the path of Allah - they have the hope of the Mercy of Allah: - - -”. Fight for Allah and be likely to go to Paradise (and if you are killed for Allah, you are sure to go there).

030 2/244: “Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah heareth and knoweth all things”. - - - And Allah rewards and punishes all things.

031 2/245: “Who is he that will loan Allah a beautiful loan, which Allah will double unto his credit and multiply many times?” Some say the “beautiful loan” is good deeds, others that it is warriors offering Allah and Muhammad their lives in war (actually this is the normal meaning), even others say it means lending money to the warring prophet Muhammad - and later to his successors - as war cost money. No matter it was good for Muhammad - and his successors: What was to be repaid in next life, did not have to be repaid - or paid - by Muhammad or his successors (or terrorist leaders) in this life. A cheap way of getting warriors.

032 2/246: “How could we refuse to fight in the cause of Allah.” The Quran pretends Jews are saying this to one of their prophets (most likely Samuel*), but it really is included as a pep talk to Muslims inspiring them to war. The text is somewhat changed compared the one in the Bible, from where it comes.

033 2/249: “How oft, by Allah’s will, hath (not*) a small force vanquished a big one? Allah is with those who steadfastly persevere”. The start is pep talk for the warriors. The last is pure psychology - you meet similar sentences time and again and again in the Quran. The warriors, terrorists and others are inoculated that: Fight on, and you may win in the end. Something the Soviet Union should have remembered before they invaded Afghanistan. And something Bush should have been told, when his general told him it would take 700ooo troops to conquer and pacify Iraq - Bush instead choose another general and sent only ca. 1/3 as many troops - - - and ended in a quagmire. It also is something all non-Muslims should remember. In their own home country and outside.

034 2/251: “By Allah’s will they (the Jews) routed them (the Philistines); and David slew Goliath and his forces”. A story borrowed from the Bible - with a twist - used as pep talk for Muslim warriors - it was their own god, Allah (in reality Yahweh according to the Bible), that did the work.

035 2/262: “Those who spend their substance in the cause of Allah, - - - for them their reward is with their Lord (Allah*)”. 2/195 and 2/245.

036 2/265: “- - - those who spend their substance, seeking to please Allah and to strengthen their souls - - -. Allah seeth well whatever ye do”. See 2/195 and 2/245.

Year 622 AD early Medina, surah 8.

037 8/1: “They (the warriors*) ask thee (Muhammad*) concerning (things taken as) spoils of war (riches and slaves*). Say: (Such) spoils are at the disposal of Allah and the Prophet (Muhammad*)”. This is one of the rules Muhammad or the omniscient Allah had to change later (and not much later) - in the end Muhammad only got 20%, except if the victimd gave in without a fight (then Muhammad still got 100%). (Islam has another explanation - all belongs to Allah, but 80% may be given to the warriors and to their leaders). You meet Muslims saying Allah/the Quran never changed anything, but here is one point that not much later was changed. Often Muslims explains changes with that the rules really were not changed, only made stricter or clarified (why should that be necessary for an omniscient god?) Here is an absolute rule that later had to be changed - the warriors demanded their share of the spoils.

038 8/5: “Just as thy Lord (Allah*) ordered you out of your house in truth (to make war against the Quraysh – battle of Badr 624 AD*) - - -.” The Muslims went out to raid a military weak caravan - - - and met a small army instead, “according to Allah’s will”. Allah likes warriors – and he needs war to promote his power and religion, even if he is omnipotent.

039 8/5 + 6: “- - - even though a party of the Believers disliked it (to do battle against the Quraysh at Badr 624 AD*). Disputing with thee (Muhammad*) concerning the truth after it was manifest - - -“. See 8/5 just above. Some Muslims refused to take part in the battle against the seemingly much stronger small army and fled before it started “even after it had been made clear that it was Allah’s will that they should do battle against the Quraysh” according to “The Message of the Quran”. War seems to be a pleasure for Allah, and necessary to augment his power and promote his religion, even though he is said to be omnipotent. Or may be it only is to test his followers and find out their quality – even though he is omniscient and knows everything before. The unsolvable contradiction made by the claims: Allah decides everything vs. man has free will, are also put to a test? But at least it is clear that Allah wants war.

040 8/7: “Allah promised you one of the two (enemy) parties (either the caravan or the small army at Badr) - - -“. Allah promised the Muslims a nice little fight – very nice of him. “The Religion of Peace”???

041 8/9: “I (Allah*) will assist you (Muslim warriors in battle*) with a thousand of angles, ranks on ranks”. A good pep talk for naïve, uneducated believers.

042 8/12: “I (Allah*) will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their fingertips off them (making them unable to use a bow*) - - -.” “The god of Peace heading the Religion of Peace”. To call this religion “the Religion of Peace” is an insult to the world – and the reason why the world does not laugh at the claim, is lack of knowledge about the Quran.

043 8/15: “When ye (Muslim warriors*) meet the Unbelievers in hostile arrays, never turn your backs to them”. Fleeing warriors were of no value to Muhammad and other leaders.

044 8/16: “If any (Muslim warrior*) do turn his back to the (the enemy*) on such a day (during battle) - - - he draws on himself the wrath of Allah, and his abode is Hell - - - “. Fight for Allah and Muhammad or end in Hell. One verse is the carrot, this one the whip. War is a central part of the life and the religion.

045 8/19: “Not the least good will your (the enemy’s) forces be to you even if they were multiplied: for verily Allah is with those who believe”. Perhaps discouraging the enemy, but surely encouraging his own warriors. “Gott mit uns.” Just this one is as old as the oldest religion - and still valid for everyone who believes it, and the uneducated, naïve early followers did believe - - - as do many Muslims even today.

*046 8/38-39: “Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief (= becomes Muslims*)) their past will be forgiven them; but if they persists - - - fight whit them - - -”. Muslims like to quote the Quran saying that there shall be no forcing others to become Muslims - it is used as a proof for that such things never happen (f. ex. 2/256). But here it is said just the opposite: Become Muslims or fight. This in reality was often the choices the other part had: Come to Islam or die - though it should be mentioned that this mostly were the case when Islam waged war on pagans, not so often when the other part were Jews or Christians - though this, and also pogroms, happened. Some Muslim wars of conquest were rather bloody - included mass murders after the victory.

These two verses are interesting because:

1. They oppose - contradicts - another verse (2/256: "Let there be no compulsion in religion") - which the Quran, Islam and Muslims say never happen).
2. They prove that force may be used to convert people to Islam.
3. They tell that refusing to convert to Islam is a valid reason for attack according to the Quran.

**047 8/39: “And fight with them (the Unbelievers who will not convert to Islam*) on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere”. Comments should be unnecessary. Fight war till Islam dominates everywhere.

We may add that “The Message of the Quran adds (remark 41 to surah 8) that only war in self defence is permitted, but self defence in “the widest meaning of the word”. And the “widest meaning” is a very wide expression – absolutely anything can (and is) explained as being done in self defence, as the non-Muslims are the guilty ones for everything. One striking sample you may meet, is the “fact” that “all Americans are guilty of aggression against Islam and can be killed, because they pay tax to the state of USA”. No concession because they after all are forced to pay tax – few do it gladly. No concession to the millions that do not pay tax. No concession to the ones that oppose the war in the Middle East. Not even concession to the - still some millions (f. ex. youths) - that do not pay tax and in addition oppose that war. Everybody is guilty – slay them. That is how “in the widest meaning” sometimes is used.

048 8/41: “And know that out of all the booty ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah”. One more good reason for waging war- the warriors and their leaders get 80% of riches and slaves - and they can rape almost anyone they like. And this Quran tells confirms the Bible!!! - who has found anything like this in NT? Stealing and plundering to make yourself and Allah/Muhammad (or his successors) rich and powerful also in this life. It simply does not exist. But this verse is interesting also for another reason: Allah/Muhammad already has had to change the words of Allah; In 8/1 (Remember here that the surahs were not “sent down” as complete surahs, but a few verses now and a few verses then, and only later puzzled together - to a large part not until the Quran was constructed around 650 - 656 AD - some 20 to 46 years after Muhammad told them. Also according to Yusuf Ali 8/1 belongs to an entirely other section (section 1) than does 8/41 (section 5) for what that information is worth.) In 8/1 everything stolen belongs to Allah, but the warriors wanted their sizable share. An omniscient god - that also has full knowledge of the future - should have known this and not have had to change the rules because of failing and learning.

049 8/45: “When ye meet a force, be firm - - -.” Order and pep-talk.

050 8/57: “If you gain the upper hand over them in war, disperse, with them those who follow them, that they may remember.” Many a Muslim warrior and warlord followed this order thoroughly – they certainly were remembered many places - - - except by all those who were dead.

051 8/58: “If thou fearest (“fearest” not “understandest” or “knowest”*) treachery from any group, throw back (their Covenant) to them, (so as to be) on equal terms: for Allah loweth not the treacherous.” – except Muslims - - - remember Muhammad’s betrayals and his words “War is betrayal” (Ibn Ishaq).

052 8/60a: “Against them (the unbelievers*) make ready your strength to the outmost of your power, included steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies (and Muhammad’s enemies*) - - -.” Inside information from “the Religion of Peace”?

053 8/60b: “Whatever (money, time or your life*) ye shall spend in the Cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly”. Recourses counts – for you to go to Paradise, for Muhammad (and Allah) to make war. And soldiers like you count – for you to gain loot or be sure to go to Paradise, for Muhammad (and Allah? – an omnipotent god really should not need war and mass murder and inhumanities? – especially not a good god.) to be able to make war and gain riches for f. ex. “oiling”, and power and followers for his religion and platform of power.)

054 8/61: “But if the enemy inclines towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace.” Well, that was what was said. All too often it was not heeded if the Muslims were strong enough – or it was a peace of terror or at best suppression.

055 8/65a: “O Prophet! (Allah says*) Rouse the Believers to the fight.” Some words for a presumably good and peaceful god. And some task for a god and perfect kind man representing a religion insisted to be a good, human and peaceful one.

056 8/65b: “If there are twenty amongst you (Muslim warriors*), patient and persevering (this (to be patient and persevering*) is impressed and impressed on Muslim warriors and terrorists - a fact non-Muslims tends not to know or to forget*), they will vanquish two hundred (non-Muslims*), if a hundred, they will vanquish a thousand of the Unbelievers: for these are people without understanding”. A good pep talk, at lest to blind believers. During the civil war in USA the South said something similar - but lost the war. But the Quran is right on one point: Non-Muslims tends not to understand the fanatic and fatalistic way of thinking impressed on Muslim warriors and terrorists - they go on and on and refuse to give in. On the other hand Japanese soldiers were just like that during WWII, but they all the same totally lost the war - even Americans were able to learn.

057 8/66: “- - - but (even so (even if Allah has lightened the fight for you - by sending angle warriors?*)) if there are a hundred of you, they will vanquish two hundred, and if a thousand, they will vanquish two thousand, with the leave of Allah - - -”. Another pep talk, and somewhat more realistic than 8/65. Besides: If you loose, know that is was not the enemy that was too strong for you, but Allah in his unfathomable wisdom who wanted it like that. (And Allah always has a good reason leading to a final victory).

But why cannot an omnipotent god just decide how he wants things to be and make it like that? Why does a presumably good and kind and loving and omnipotent god have to let humans live through so much blood and murder and hate and rape and misery? Something in the Quran just does not add up.

***058 8/66: “- - - for Allah is with those who patiently persevere.” This is a pep talk all non-Muslims should forever remember - fanatic Muslim warriors never give in and never stops.

And also: How many soldiers in the future did Spain kill by pulling out their few men from the East a few years ago, and "proving" to Muslims just these words that are repeated and repeated in the Quran? - a proof that now (2007) may be strengthened by Australia.

***059 8/67: “It is not fitting for a Prophet (Muhammad*) that he should have prisoners of war until he hath thoroughly subdued the land”. One of the moral and ethical real pinnacles in Islam. It takes an effort - and resources - to take care of prisoners. This Muhammad did not like - and voila! - Allah ordered him to kill all prisoners (of course with the exception of the ones one wanted as slaves or wanted to keep for extorting money for from their families).

No doubt at all: A morally and ethically superior god and religion, both with lots of empathy - not to forget the perfect and good and kind and good-hearted Muhammad who was free from sins. (Actually there never were philosophers thinking on morality and ethics in Islam like f. ex. in the old Greece or later in the West. Muhammad just picked from the contemporary traditions - in some cases he picked good ideas, in other cases he chose rather inhuman ideals, and that was it, as it never later has been permitted to think about whether his rules are good - or the best - or not.)

Does anybody wonder why Muslim warriors and terrorists murder prisoners - guilty or not?

**060 8/69: “But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good - - -”. This is one more of the moral and ethical pinnacles in the Quran: Wage war, and then it is “lawful and good” to steal and rob and plunder - and rape the women and take slaves.

But of course this made it easy and cheap for Muhammad and his successors to get warriors. That such behaviour is a catastrophe for any and all victims - and in some cases set back the civilization may be some hundred years like in Persia - does not count, as non-Muslim “untermench” do not count.

This even more so as for fanatics nearly every situation they do not like, can be defined as war against Islam “in the widest meaning of the word” - not to mention that according to Islam’s definition all areas not dominated by Islam are “land of war”. Really a morally and ethical superior religion. And a peaceful one.

And honestly the word “good” in ”lawful and good” classifies Muhammad, the Quran and Islam. Laws can be twisted and remade and it is no problem for an absolute dictator to make what laws he wants and thus make things “lawful” – quotation marks used on purpose. But the word “good” is an absolute – flexible “borders”, but fundamentally an absolute. Allah’s/Muhammad’s real rules for behaviour against all outsiders is way outside “good” and the hypocrisy in the using of abrogated verses in the Quran to make outsiders believe something else, makes this aspect of the religion and the hypocrites even more disgusting.

061 8/71: “- - - if they (prisoners of war) have treacherous designs against thee - - -”. How can an enemy prisoner “have treacherous designs” against someone. Per definition an enemy - even a prisoner - can fight you with different means, but that is fighting, not betrayal. (To betray someone there has to be some sort of positive connection between the two parts - if not it is not betrayal or “treacherous designs“).

**062 8/72: “Those who believed - - - and fought for the Faith, with their property (= gave money - like many Muslims do even today*) and their persons (= went to war personally*), in the cause of Allah, as well as those who gave them (warriors, terrorists*) asylum and aid (like what a large numbers of Muslims do today also - at least giving money and sympathy and aid to “the cause” included terrorism*) - all these (are good Muslims*)”. Comments unnecessary.

063 8/73: “- - - unless you do this, (protect each others (included warriors and terrorists*)), there would be tumult and oppression on earth, and great mischief (because of the bad non-Muslims*)” No comments - especially since there is neither suppression of, nor mischief against non-Muslims in Muslim countries (?).

**064 8/74: “Those who believe, and adopt exile, and fight (and here it is meant by weapons*) for the Faith, in the cause of Allah as well as those who give (them) asylum and aid - these are (all) in very truth the Believers - - -”. Adolph Hitler was rather young when he wrote “Mein Kampf”, describing his plans and how he worked for to conquer the world in his future - the world did not believe him (no other comparisons intended). The Quran describes how Muslims have to behave, work and fight to dominate the world - does the world believe it and them?

065 8/74: “- - - for them (warriors, terrorist and all their helpers and those giving them aid*), for them is the forgiveness of sins and a provision most generous”. This sentence tells a lot about Islam. And it also is a good pep talk.

It also may explain some of all the help terrorists get from “normal” Muslims.

066 8/75: “And those (non-Muslims*) who accept Faith (become Muslims*) subsequently, and fight for the Faith in your company - they are of you”. If you become Muslim and wage war for Islam, you have proved you are a real Muslim. A good kind of proof for any Muslim leader who needs warriors or terrorists.

Year 624 – 625 (?). Surah 59:

067 59/2: “It is He (Allah*) Who got out the unbelievers (the Jewish tribe Banu al-Nadir*) amongst the People of the Book (= Jews and Christians*) from their homes at the first gathering (of the forces).” This was an expulsion of non-Arabs from Medina, after Muhammad found an excuse to act against them – Muhammad actually wanted to kill them, but one of the Arab tribes who had a covenant with Banu al-Nadir made that impossible for him – he still was not strong enough military. This happened shortly after the battle of Badr in 624 AD. It was one of Muhammad’s first step towards becoming economically really self-sufficient as he “took over” all their land, etc., and an essential step towards absolute power in Medina.

068 59/5: “Whether ye cut down (O ye Muslims!) the tender palm-trees - - -.” To cut down palm-trees – the very basis for life in the desert – was reckoned to be such a “low” deed, that it was almost unheard of. But Muhammad did so – in an act of sheer terrorism and psychological warfare. (Muslims today tries to explain away this terrorist act or worse, by telling that he made an open place for a battlefield. This “explanation” is just so much rubbish. For one thing: If there is one thing there is enough of in an arid and desert land, it is open space – it was just to agree on where to meet. For another: Who have in all the history of war ever heard of primitive warriors felling the forest to make opening for a fight? For a third: Anyone – absolutely anyone, included any Muslim – who has ever seen a plantation of date palms, knows very well that there is plenty of space for fighting between the trees. But the main fact: Who the hec would believe that a weak force – the Banu al-Nadir – would come out from behind reasonably secure walls to fight an open battle against a much stronger enemy? – and on top of all leave their families undefended? No sane man knowing two millimetres about warfare would believe so – and Muhammad already knew a lot about warfare. You have to be very naïve to believe this “explanation”. Muslim terrorism is nothing new.

069 59/6: “What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger (Muhammad*) (and taken away) from them (Banu al-Nadir*) – for this ye (the Muslim warriors*) made no expedition with either cavalry or camelery - - -.” Which was very nice for Muhammad, because when there was no fight and the enemy just gave in, all the spoils of war was called “fay” and was for Allah/Muhammad alone. Muhammad in a short time got a good economy.

070 59/7: “What Allah has bestoved on His Messenger (Muhammad*) (and taken away from) the people of the townships (= robbed from vanquished people*) belongs to Allah – to his Messenger and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer” – and what is not mentioned here: For Muhammad himself and his big family (though it is likely to be true that he did not live in luxury), for payment to the ones who distributed the riches, for “gifts” to make undecided persons becoming or staying Muslims, for in other ways promoting the religion, and not least to financing more wars. Also the fixed “poor tax” all Muslims that are not too poor have to pay, also are for all these purposes, and as often a lot did go to fighting and other things, it is a question if the name “poor tax” is quite correct. Also see 59/6 just above.

Year ca. 625 AD most of it. (It may be no. 2 in Medina, but 625 is late for that), surah 3.

*071 3/111: “- - - if they (the People of the Book = mainly Jews and Christians) come out to fight you, they will show you their backs, and no help will they get”. Pep talk for warriors. Not always true as history has shown and shows.

072 3/122: “Remember the two of your parties mediated cowardice, but Allah was their protector - - - (and they went to battle*) - - -”. Pep talk.

073 3/123: “Allah helped you at Badr - - -”. This was a battle against the Meccans that the Muslims won, in spite of being outnumbered 3 : 1 (according to Muslim sources - there are no others). Pep talk - he helped you then, we believe, and it is likely he will help you in other battles, too.

074 3/124: “Is it not enough for you (Muslims in battle*) that Allah should help you with three thousand angles (specially) sent down?” Pep talk to warriors - Allah helps you in battle with angle warriors. Morals counts in battle, and battle was essential for Muhammad at this time, though in 625 AD he might also think about defence against Mecca - they might again attack to stop his robbing their caravans.

*075 3/125: “Yea - if ye (Muslim warriors*) remain firm, and act aright, even if the enemy should rush here on you in hot haste, your Lord (Allah) would help you with five thousand angels making a terrific onslaught”. Pep talk to warriors - “Gott mit uns”. The primitive, uneducated masses of Muhammad’s first followers were likely to believe this - especially as they the first more than 100 years (till 732 AD) often won the battles and the wars. What is worse; some fundamentalists or fanatics may still believe it today.

076 3/140: “If a wound hath touched you (Muslim warrior*), be sure a similar wound hath touched the others (the enemy*)”. Keep the warriors bent on fighting on. A peaceful religion.

077 3/141: “Allah’s object also is to purge those that are true in Faith (true Muslims) and to deprive of blessing those that resist Faith (the ones not believing or not believing strongly enough in Muhammad*).” An answer to the obvious question: Why do Muslims have to wage war and risk their lives, when Allah just could say “Be” and it was? But the answer is not a good one - an omniscient god had known without mass slaughtering (but Muhammad had not gained power without war, if Allah does not exist). Some sort of explanation at least, why war was “necessary”.

078 3/142: “Did you think that ye would enter Heaven without testing those of you who had fought hard (in his Cause) and remained steadfast (- they deserve a good place in heaven*)”. No comments necessary excep: Why - why - does an omniscient god have to test his followers?? - he knows everything before, and even decides everything before! There is no logic in this. (But there clearly is a logic if the religion was made up by a Muhammad wanting power.)

*079 3/146: “How many of the Prophets fought (in Allah’s way), and with them fought large bands of godly men? But they never lost heart if they met with disaster in Allah’s way, nor did they weaken (in will) nor give in. And Allah loves those who are firm and steadfast.” A pep-talk to warriors of all times - never give in, never give up, retreat if you have to, but go on and you will win like the prophets, because Allah will help - - - and sooner or later the lover of religious warriors, Allah, will give you Paradise. Like in the Old Norse religion.

As for prophets, Islam maintains that they have existed to all times and all places - Hadith mention the number 124ooo, but even that is just a symbol for uncountable many. This is not true, because it is not possible to find a single trace of monotheistic prophets (except the few in the Bible) anywhere or any time in any form - history, literature, art, architecture, archaeology, or even in folk tales. It is not possible that so many prophets should leave not a single trace - especially the warring ones should leave traces, even if they had no success with spreading the religion.

And not many of the prophets we know about from other sources - mainly the Bible - did actually wage war (NB: The Bible does not recon f. ex. Saul and David - and not even Abraham, Isac, or Jacob, not to mention Ishmael - as prophets.)

But Mr. Bush and others should have remembered this with being steadfast.

080 3/147: “- - - help us with those that resist Faith”. Allah will help if you fight for Islam - or for Islamic leaders telling they defend Ummah and Islam.

Psychologically a mighty incitement and a strength for upping the fighting spirit, especially with uneducated, primitive warriors or fanatics.

081 3/148a: “And Allah gave them (the warriors) a reward in this world and the excellent reward of the Hereafter”. 80% of the spoils of war - included slaves and women - were for the warriors and their leaders (the remaining 20% were for Allah/Muhammad/the religious leaders - which soon also became political leaders). Women made slaves were fun, because to rape female slaves was your right and no sin. In addition to do battle for Islam was - and is - a “heavy” application for Paradise, and a sure way to get there no matter what kind of life you have led, if you are killed in battle for Islam (which soon also meant - and means - for the leaders). But it is a strang fact that leaders never become suiside bombers.

082 3/148b: “For Allah loveth those who do good (in this case: To wage war for Allah and Muhammad*)”. To do battle for Allah - to burn and kill and murder and destroy and rape for the good deity - is a good thing that Allah loves. Did anyone say that modern terrorists have to twist the words of the Quran to find incitements to their deeds? And also: Muhammad got cheap warriors and gained wealth and power - in wars and robberies that really were illegal according to the Quran, as they in reality were wars of aggression, not really of defence. And they gave him the possibility to rape at least two women - Raihana bint Amr and Safijja bint Huayay.

083 3/152: “Allah did indeed fulfil His promise to you when ye with His permission were about to annihilate your enemy - until you flinched and fell to disputing about the order, and disobeyed it- - -”. This refers to the battle of Uhud - the second battle between the forces of Muhammad and Mecca - 5 km from Medina. In this battle the Meccans had greater forces, but it is a military truth that it is easier to defend than to attack - compare f. ex. to Napoleon vs. Wellington’s inferior forces at Waterloo until Blucher and his Germans arrived, or Malta in 1565 - some 40ooo Muslim warriors vs. a little better than 1ooo defenders + some 8ooo locals, where the attackers had to withdraw after many weeks of battle (from May 18. to September 8.), and partly because of this lost the hegemony in the Mediterranean Sea. Or for that case Malta during WW2: Small British forces plus the locals vs. nominally hugely superior Italian and some German forces - but Malta never fell.

At Uhud Muhammad’s forces seemed to be winning. But the archers did want to get their parts of the spoils, and left their defending positions - - - and the battle turned. Politely said it ended in a draw (Muhammad in reality lost the battle), and Muhammad lost lots of men. It got no further serious consequences, though, as Mecca did not come back until much later, and then Medina and Muhammad were prepared (the Battle of the Trench, which Muhammad won - the last real battle with Mecca. Well, actually it was no real battle, just a siege, from which the Meccans had to withdraw in the end).

But in this case the lesson seemed to be: Allah kept his word as long as the warriors obeyed Muhammad - and Allah. When they stopped doing that, things went wrong. Lesson: Allah keeps his words and Allah helps in battle, as long as you obey his - the religious (often the same as the political) leader’s - orders. Terrorists and warriors: Obey Allah and your leaders.

084 3/154: “Even if you had remained in your homes, those of you for whom death was decreed would certainly have gone forth to their place of their death”. Predestination is a mighty incitement to do battle - you can as well fight for your leader and Allah, because it is not dangerous, as you will not die until your destined time anyhow, and you have a lot to gain in a war - booty, slaves and Paradise. See also “Mistakes in the Quran“, 3/154.

085 3/155: “Those of you who turned back on the day the two hosts met (300 men left Uhud before the battle, leaving 700 to fight, according to Islamic sources) - it was Satan who caused them to fail, - - -.” It is Satan that makes you not want to or too afraid to take part in battles - do you want to be a friend of Satan? A mighty incitement for fighting for Muhammad and Islam (or sometimes for leaders using or disusing the religion for personal gain or power).

086 3/156: “Be not like the Unbelievers, who say of their brethren, - - - ‘If they had stayed with us (out of battle*), they would not have died, or been slain”. It is not worthy a Muslim to think like that - to do battle for Muhammad is a holy duty - - - and a way to riches and Paradise. Good to know for a terrorist - - - if he really is not misled when he believes he fights for Allah, and if the Quran is true. (The many mistakes in the Quran make one wonder about how true it is also on this point - especially as it is easy by means of statistics to prove that the battlefield is far more dangerous than your bed.)

**087 3/157: “And if ye are slain, or die, in the way of Allah, forgiveness and mercy from Allah are far better than all they could amass”. Nearly no matter how bad a man (nothing is said about women) you have been, to be killed for Allah, is the sure way to go to Paradise.

The old Vikings “knew” that if they were killed in battle, they went to Valhalla - that made them ferocious warriors. In Islam Paradise with its lazy luxury life and plenty of women, had and has the same effect.

There are two questions, though: Who decides which wars are wanted by Allah? - if you look at history, it seems that a lot of the wars Muslims have fought, in reality was for wealth and power, but mostly they have been declared Holy Wars, a few times even by both sides when both parts were Muslims. And: What if the Quran is invented or not telling the full truth? - all the mistakes and contradictions, etc. in the book make one wonder.

In the wars between Sunni and Shi’a and in power struggles among leaders, a lot of warriors have been cheated - both parts in a war between Muslims cannot be fighting for Allah and the “right” belief, but all warriors often were told they fought against enemies of Allah. If at least one part was right, the warriors from the opposite part had a rude awakening in Hell, even if they were told and believed they were fighting enemies of Allah. Not to mention when all was a struggle for power among leaders, and Allah did not agree at all that any of them were fighting for him - they only were sinning by killing fellow Muslims “without a good reason”, which is a grave sin worthy of Hell.

And even worse: If the Quran is made up or does not tell the truth on this point, no comment is necessary. Especially not if there exists another, true religion somewhere - a religion Muslims are prohibitted to look for.

**088 3/158: “And if ye die, or are slain, lo! It is unto Allah that ye are brought together”. Be killed in war for Allah, and go to paradise - good “knowledge” for a warrior or terrorist. Whoever said the Quran has to be disused to justify terrorism, hardly ever read the Quran. See also 3/157.

089 3/168: “If only they had listened to us (and not gone to war*), they would not have been slain”. That is what hypocrite Muslims say, according to the Quran - and who wants to be a hypocrite? Good pep talk.

**090 3/169: “Think not of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead. Nay, they live - - - in the presence of their Lord (Allah*)”. What better can a warrior ask for? - and thinking like that, they made - and make - cheap soldiers for Muslim leaders. But what if Muhammad made it all up?

**091 3/170: The family and others left behind by dead warriors, have no reason to grieve - their dear one - the warrior - is in Paradise. If it really was a war for Allah, and not for power or riches for some leader. And if the Quran speaks the truth on this point at least.

092 3/171: “They (the “martyrs”*) glory in the grace and the Bounty (silver and brocade and women*) from Allah - - -”. The ultimate pep talk: Your son or husband or father is dead and you will never see him again, and he will never help you if you need - but he is in heaven according to a book with hundreds of mistakes.

093 3/172: “Of those who answered the call of Allah and the Messenger even after being wounded - - - have a great reward.” No comments, except that Muhammad needed only fighting warriors, and he seems to want to use his resources to the outmost.

094 3/173: “Men said to them: ’A great army is gathering against you’: - - - but it (only) increased their Faith - - -”. Pep talk. Real Muslims are not frightened - and Allah will help. Pep talk incites the warriors to keep fighting, and to wage war, that was of course necessary for Muhammad to gain security, power and riches. Like for many warlords at that time.

095 3/174: “And they returned (from war) with Grace and Bounty from Allah: no harm ever touched them - - -”. A fairy tale picture of war and easy riches. A good pep talk for recruiting new warriors if the men are uneducated and naïve. Glorifying war and spoils of war attracts new warriors. The larger the “army” the better chance of success and power for leaders.

096 3/175: “It is only Satan that suggests to you the fear (of battles*)”. Who wants to be the subject of Satan - it is better to fear Allah and Muhammad and not shy away form fighting.

**097 3/195: “- - - those who have left their homes, or been driven out therefrom, or suffered harm in My (Allah’s*) cause, or fought or been slain - verily, I will blot out from them their iniquities, and admit them into (Paradise*)”. This has two messages: Persons who are persecuted for being Muslims and also warriors that go out to fight for Islam - they are the same, and both will end in Paradise. Many a terrorist has left his home, he may intend to fight - or call what he does a fight. With a bit of luck - or on purpose - he may die for the “cause”. Excellent - next stop is paradise, nearly no matter what sins you have done before. Did anyone say that the Quran had to be disused to incite to hate, killing, rape, war and terrorism?

Year 625 - 626 AD, surah 61:

**098 61/4: “Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array as if they were a solid cemented structure”. The ones who say the Quran is as good as the Bible, not to mention NT, have never read the Quran - which we can say even if we are not very Christian.

1. A god loving mass slaughter and murderers!!!
2. If that is a good god, I do hope I never meet a bad one.
3. And this is the icon and ideal of Islam!
4. Will you like to live in a Muslim society in a world ruled by such a religion?
5. And remember: War and hate is only one part of Islam.

Year 625 (627?) - 629 AD, (most likely not earlier than 627, as there are references to the last battle with Mecca - the Battle of the Trench), surah 33:

099 Surah 33: The Muslims got the warning a long time before Mecca and some allied attacked. Advised by a man from Persia (according to the tradition), Salman al-Farisi, the Muslims had time to dig a deep trench all around Medina. As this was a kind of defence never used in the area before, the attackers were totally unprepared for this, and were unable to cross it under fire. They had to withdraw after some weeks - partly because of ice-cold weather. According to the Quran, the Muslims were saved by Allah.

The first 20 verses are mostly a tale about the battle. Then after the battle things happened - Muhammad suspected some Jews to be not reliable, even though they had not participated in the attack. Muslims like to insist the Jews had helped the attackers, but according to others this was not true, and all that happened was because of Muhammad’s suspicion. The Muslims attacked these Jews and made them prisoners. Then Muhammad simply let murder all the men - we have seen numbers from 600 to 900, but the most likely number is some 700. Helpless prisoners. Muslims have a tendency to pass over or gloss over this and later similar incidents. Not less do they “explain” or simply skip the rest of that story: Muhammad took all the women and children as slaves - we have never seen a reliable number here, but some 2000 are likely. One of the women, Safijj bint Huayay, Muhammad personally “took to his bed” = he raped her and later married her - what choice did she have? Earlier he had raped Raihans bint Amr under similar circumstances. Seh refused to marry him, and he kept her as his personal harem slave (concubine). And of course the Muslims took over all their possessions and fields. Mass murder sometimes is good business. (These attacks on the Jews also made Muhammad economically self sufficient.)

And that was the end of the Jewish tribe of Quraiza in Khaybar.

All this aided by the good and peaceful god Allah: No surprise that Muslim terrorist murder prisoners even today - they have a good and infallible teacher.

100 33/16: “Running away will not profit you, if you are running away from death or slaughter (war*); and even if (ye do escape), no more than a brief (respite) will ye be allowed to enjoy!” Allah has decided when you are to die – according to Hadiths that happens 5 months before you are born. Because of that there is no reason to flee from battle – you will not live any longer (or shorter) anyhow.

**101 33/26: “And those of the People of the Book (the Jews of the Quraiza tribe - see above*) who had aided them - Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror in their hearts. (So that) some ye (the Muslims/Muhammad) slew, and some ye made prisoners.” Very simple and “good and lawful” - to quote another verse - mass murdering, enslavement and robbery.

A good and loving god and a peaceful religion - and this was far from the only pogrom in Muslim countries through the times. But it is typical that Allah sanctified the attack only afterwards.

102 33/27: “And He (Allah) made you heirs of their land, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which ye had not frequented (before). And Allah has power over all things”. Some rich spoils of war can justify much, and quiet many a man’s conscience - especially when a god sanctifies it. Could such things happen today or in the future? - we do not mention names like Darfur or Indonesia or East Timor or the Turks against Christian underlings around 1900 AD - f. ex. in Armenia and Smyrna.

***103 33/61: “- - - whenever they (hypocrites and bad non-Muslims, whoever decides whom they are*) are found, they shall be sized and slain (without mercy)”. A good verse for many a mullah and imam - and for starting pogroms. What disturbs us is that this may be the future many places.

Year most likely 626 AD most of it, surah 4:

**104 4/66: “If We (Allah*) had ordered them to sacrifice their lives or to leave their homes, very few of them would have done it (also most Muslims do not like war*): but if they had done what they were (actually) told, it would have been best for them - - -”. Allah had liked them better if they went to war, and willingly. Like the Old Norse religion, Islam glorifies war, at least war for Allah and Muhammad (and his successors). And like the Old Norse religion, to die in battle meant to go to Paradise. That makes ferocious warriors - and today: Ferocious terrorists. Terrorists often do not qualify for Paradise even according to the rules of the Quran (their “war” is not really jihad, even if their leaders have told them so, and/or they practise their “war” in ways not accepted by the Quran - killing the not guilty, f. ex. - even though the terrorists “define” the victims as guilty - intended self murder, really is said not to be according to Islam, etc.), but as long as terrorists believe they are right, the effect is the same.

*105 4/67: “And We (Allah*) should have given them (the ones reluctant to give their lives, see 4/66) from Our Presence a great reward (if they went to war*)”. One of the many incitements to war for a good and peaceful god or religion or prophet. Sometimes we feel that the ugly West may be after all have a better philosophy and ethics. And may be a more human god, even though it is politically correct to dismiss and slander him.

*106 4/68: “And We (Allah*) should have shown them (see 4/67 just above) the Straight Way (= the way to Paradise*) (if they went to war)”. War was essential for Muhammad - and still is for some Muslims - and there are lots of incitements to go to war. Like it or not - NT is far, far more peaceful. Yes, even OT, as that tells about old wars, bur does not incite to war forever. And it is far from true when Muslims tell Islam is a peaceful religion (except towards fellow Muslims of the same sects).

107 4/71: “O ye who believe! Take your precautions, and either go forth (in war*) in parties or go forth all together”. Be strong when you attack.

*108 4/74a: “Let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter”. If you are willing to exchange your life here on Earth for a future life in Paradise, you should be permitted to - and qualified to - wage war for Allah. (Only let us hope you are not cheated. If something is wrong in the Quran - and at least a number of facts are wrong - you may be in for quite a surprise. Not to mention what a rude awakening you will have if Islam is a dreamed-up religion, and there is another religion that is true. But in the meantime Muslim leaders have a cheap source for warriors and terrorists).

109 4/74b: “To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah - whether he is slain or gets victory - soon shall we give him a reward of great (value) (= Paradise*)”. What can be a better reward? And what can be a cheaper way for leaders to get warriors, than promises of payment in the next life?

**110 4/75: “And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah - - -?” This sentence tells more about Islam, than explanations longer than the Quran could do. Actually if the Quran had been published today, it had qualified for lawsuits for incitement to hate, incitement to terror, incitement to war, slander, and incitement to discrimination. Actually in the Netherlands the question of prohibiting the book for just these reasons, have been aired. They will not succeed, of course, as it is religion, but just the proposal tells volumes about how “peaceful” the book is. (The Quran is peaceful inside a Muslim society, but not towards non-Muslims - not even towards all Muslim societies, see the strife between Sunni Muslims (that in a little way can be likened to Protestants among Christians) and Shiia Muslims (that in as little a way can be likened to Catholics)).

***111 4/76: “Those who believe (Muslims*) fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith (non-Muslims*) fight in the cause of Evil: so fight ye against the friends of Satan - - -.” To say the least of it: The words are not to be misunderstood: Fight the non-Muslims, because they are the friends of Satan.

*112 4/77: “Our Lord! Why hast Thou ordered us to fight?” This is a question from a Muslim not wanting to fight - and we should remember that after all they are the majority (but the trouble for non-Muslims is that it is difficult and impossible to know who are terrorists, who are helping terrorists, who give money to terrorists, who has sympathy with terrorism and who are just plain - and often sympathetic - humans). But the verse makes it very clear - as do many other verses in the Quran - that war for the religion is a duty and an order. Who said that terrorists have to disuse the Quran to find incitement and reasons?

113 4/77: Said on behalf of Allah to those who do not want to go to war for Islam: “Short is the enjoyment of this world: the Hereafter is the best for those who do right: - - -”. And the ones doing right, are those who fight wars for Allah.

*114 4/78: “Wherever you are, death will find you, even if ye are in towers built up strong and high!” This is one side of the Quran’s and Islam’s predestination: No matter where you are, you will die when the time Allah has allotted you are up. Therefore it is no more dangerous for you in a battle than in your bed - you will not die before your time is up anyhow. Of course it is wrong - if not your intelligence tells you that, it is easy to prove by statistics. But naïve or religiously blind persons may believe it - and then Muhammad got (and gets) the effect he wanted.

115 4/84: “Then fight in Allah’s cause - - -”. Once more a clear order. See f. ex. 4/78.

*116 4/89: “But if they (the ones not strongly enough believing in Islam and in Muhammad*) turn renegades, size them and slay them: and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their rank”. Two quotes from the New Testament: “Love your enemies”, “You shall not kill”. The ones believing Allah and Yahweh is the same god, has to study psychology.

117 4/90: “- - - if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and instead send you (guarantees of) peace, then Allah hath opened no way for you (to war against them).” Positive, if very limited. But it is a question how often even this limited order for peace is respected. How many kidnapped persons fought the terrorists? - They were kidnapped anyhow, and some cold-bloodedly murdered. This not to mention what has happened through the history.

118 4/91: “- - - if they (the non-Muslims) withdraw not from you nor give you (guarantees) of peace, size them and slay them wherever you get them: - - -”. NT: “Turn the other cheek”, “Love your enemy”, “You shall not kill”. The god of the New Testament definitely has a totally different mentality. If Yahweh and Allah are not a case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, it is not possible it is the same god.

119 4/94: “Say not (warrior during raid/war*) to anyone who offers you solution: ‘Thou art none of a believer!” – coveting the perishable goods of this life - - -.” Most of Arabia and many other places were turned Islamic in this way – people became Muslims to save life and what they owned. And some were not believed or pretended not to be believed, so that the warriors could steal – or kill or rape – as they wished.

*120 4/95a: “Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive with their gods and persons (remember; in the Quran strife normally means physical fighting*) than those who sit (at home).” A very clear incitement for going to war. Anyone believing the Quran is peaceful towards any outsider after having read the book, needs help.

*121 4/95b: “Unto all (in Faith (= all Muslims*)) hath Allah promised good: but those who strive hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by special reward -.” Are any comments necessary? - except f. ex. compare this to NT. The Quran is far more warlike and murder-like than NT or f. ex. Buddhism - far more.

And what a nice verse for a terrorist!

122 4/100: “He who forsakes his home in the cause of Allah - - - should he die as a refugee from home for Allah and his Messenger, his reward becomes due and sure with Allah - - -”. Even if you do not die in battle, just die in war - f. ex. from illness or accident - it seems like you go directly to Paradise. War for Allah really is valuable for Muslims. A fact any terrorist "knows" - most of them are Muslims.

123 4/104: “He who forsakes his home in the cause of Allah - - - should he die as a refugee from home for Allah and His (Allah’s) Messenger (Muhammad*), his reward becomes due and sure with Allah - - -.” Die for Muhammad – and for Allah if he exists – and be sure to go to heaven and the (mainly) sensual pleasures there. What more can a primitive – often brutalized from war and from his own inhuman deeds - young warrior dream of? Muhammad got many and for him cheap warriors.

**124 4/141: “And never will Allah grant to the unbelievers a way to triumph over the believers”. The development seemed to justify this verse for Muslims for 110 years - they lost battles, but hardly ever a war, at least not as they stormed westwards. Not until they lost the war in France against Carl Martell in 732. That made an impression - at least for some - and for a time made some doubt the infallibility of the Quran. The same effect - and stronger - one got over the losses against the west during the 1800s and early 1900. Allah - why did he not let them win?

But it is meant as pep talk. And an efficient pep talk it really is. Most active Muslims expect to win total power on Earth sooner or later in accordance with Allah’s/Muhammad’s word.

Will it be like living in Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Turkey, North Pakistan, Libya, Ethiopia, or Iran? Or Afghanisten?

Year: Late 628 AD. Surah 48 (100):

**125 48/15: “Those who lagged behind (did not take active part in the battle or fight*) (will say), when ye (the “real” warriors*) (are free to) march and take booty (in war) - - -”. The stealing and robbing and taking of slaves and women, are for the active warriors only - a huge incentive for poor, uneducated ruffians. Is it partly the same effect we see in Darfur and saw f. ex. in Bangladesh and East Timor? - easy to find warriors, and most inhuman behaviour. May such things happen other places if Islam grows strong enough and fanatics - or the "right" kind of mullahs or imams - take over the leadership? There are tendencies in London, and many of the 9/11 terrorists came from Hamburg - not to mention the unrest in many cities in France in 2006, and for that case in some a little liberal countries in (North) Africa where fanatics want to take over power (one exception may - just may - be Turkey, which has been secular since Ataturk in the 1920s. There may be a chance. Strangely enough also Bangladesh and Malaysia have a small chance to become human democracies - and perhaps Jordan and a couple of the emirates benevolent dictatorships. But the rest of all the Muslim world either is in the grip of fanatics or is drifting that way at present - towards what some call Muslim radicalism, others Muslim conservatism - likely the most correct expression - and even others Islamism, but which all just are different names for fanatics).

What had the world looked like today if the Muslim world had not petrified into stony fundamentalism and stagnated? - if it was the Muslim world who had developed industry and superior weapons and ways of fighting? You can bet against very heavy odds that the world now had been ruled by imams, and without any realistic chance of ever becomming a free world.

**126 48/16a: “Say to the desert Arabs (but most of the Quran is valid for all people and all times according to Islam*) who lagged behind: ‘Ye shall be summoned (to fight) against a people given to vehement war: then shall ye fight, or they shall submit. Then if ye show obedience (fight*), Allah will grant you a goodly reward (rich spoils of war and Paradise*) - - -”. A huge carrot to make fighting attractive - but what peaceful religion goes far out to make war attractive?

***127 48/16b: “- - - but if ye (see first part of 48/16a just above*) turn back (refuse to fight*) as ye did before, He (Allah*) will punish you with a grievous Penalty”. Very clear words from Muhammad and then Islam: Do battle or end in Hell. Some nice "Religion of Peace".

When you see the verse 48/16 as a whole, there is only this conclusion possible to draw: A man who says the Quran teaches a human and peaceful and friendly religion towards non-Muslims and some fractions of Muslims, either has not read the Quran, or is deceiving himself, or is lying - and knows he is lying. And any man believing him either has not read the Quran, or is deceiving himself or is naïve.

The same is the only conclusion possible after reading the whole Quran, and especially the surahs from Medina - which on top of all dominates over the more peaceful ones from Mecca according to Islam’s own rule abrogation, as the ones from Medina are younger.

If a book about politics or any other subject than religion (actually for Muslims religion is politics), inciting so strongly to hate, (religious) racism, suppression (of women and of all outsiders), rape, murder and war, it had been prohibited in all civilized and most little civilized countries. (It is proposed to prohibit it in the Netherlands, but it will not be politically possible to do it).

***128 48/17a: “- - - but he (the Muslim*) that obeys Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad*) - (Allah) will admit him to Gardens beneath which rivers flow - - -”. The great War God (Allah) and his representative and High Commander on Earth (Muhammad) will admit any dead warrior (aka robber, murderer, rapist, etc., “good and lawful” according to the Quran) to their warriors’ paradise with riches and women. Also see 48/16a and 48/16b just above.

128 48/17b: “and he (see first part of 48/17a just above*) who turns back (from doing battle*) (Allah) will punish him with a grievous Penalty.” No more comments necessary - but see 48/17a just above + 48/16a and 48/16b above.

Year 630 - 632 AD, surah 57:

**130 57/10: “And what cause have ye why ye should not spend in the cause of Allah? - For to Allah belongs the heritage of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth.” Scattered many places in the Medina part of the Quran you will find incitements to giving money or spending recourses for Muhammad and the faith. Some places it simply may mean spending for charity to the poor. But mostly it refers to spending for war (in this verse there is little doubt that this is what is meant, as this is a verse glorifying war). Also - and especially when Muhammad talks about “giving a nice gift to Allah”, “a beautiful loan” or something similar, it means that you/the Muslims should give their lives for Allah “and his Messenger” (if the Quran is made up, the “gift” is just for Muhammad) and be repaid in the next life - cheap for Muhammad and later Muslim leaders at least, especially if the religion is a made up one, like all the mistakes, contradictions, etc. may indicate.

We have skipped these verses. But thinking it over they are verses meaning much for Muslims giving money to among others terrorists and terrorist organisations. May be we will include some more of those verses if this is ever revised. But remember that there exist a number of sentences like this in the Quran - also economy counts for a leader trying to gain more political or military power.

**131 57/10: “Not equal among you are those who spent (freely) and fought before the Victory (before taking Mecca 630 AD*), (with those who did so later. Those are higher in rank - - - “. It is typical for Islam after 622 AD in Medina, that what counts is not what kind of man (women counts little) you are, what good things you have done - though charity counts some - how you care for your fellow citizens, what is in your heart, etc. What really counts is how eager a warrior you are - and here Muhammad/Allah is giving the early warrior followers some extra praise.

Compare this to NT and see if Allah = Yahweh. Impossible unless Yahweh - or Allah - is mentally ill.

*132 57/10: “Those (the early warrior followers*) are higher in rank than those who spent (freely) afterwards. But to all has Allah promised a goodly (reward).” War - and spending from your possessions for war - is what really counts (this is especially clear as the Quran other places in words not possible to understand says that the ones just giving to and helping, are not equal to the real warriors).

Did somebody say something about a peaceful religion or about a good and peaceful and kind Muhammad?

*133 57/11: “Who is he that will loan to Allah a beautiful loan (= give Allah his life in war*)? For Allah will increase it manifold to his credit, and he will have (besides) a liberal reward.” Be killed in war and the god will reward you. This may remind one of the Old Norse religion or of Gingis Khans's religion - but it DEFINITELY is no confirmation of the Bible, and especially not NT. And is this a good god?

134 57/18: “For those who give to Charity, men and women, and loan to Allah a Beautiful Loan, it shall be increased manifold (to their credit), and they shall have (beside) a liberal reward.” Well, here at last also the not warriors are included - warriors and all others will get rewards in the next life - with no expenses for the warlord Muhammad. (Muhammad in Medina was a typical warlord of his time - like some you even today find in uncivilised parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan. It may be said that he was not worse than other warlords in Arabia at that time, but it definitely is true that he neither was any better, more human, nor less bloody. Which he should have been if he had represented a good god).

*Year 631 AD, Surah 9:

Verse 9/5 is the famous and infamous “Sword Verse”. And as if this verse was not bloody enough, it is strengthened by among others these verses: 4/91, 8/39, 8/60, 9/29, 9/33, 9/73, 9/123, 25/36, 33/61, 33/73, 47/4, and 66/9. Which means that f. ex. a central verse in the pro-Islamic not always honest (al-Taqiyya?) propaganda, like verse 2/256: “Let there be no compulsion in religion” is killed and made invalid – abrogated – by at least these 13 different verses (and actually a good number more - at least some 30.).

135 9/5a: The Muslims and Muhammad had treaties with some pagan tribes who had kept their part of the treaties as promised. Muhammad therefore could not attack them before the time/months of agreement were over, “for Allah loveth the righteous”.

“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find them, and seize them and beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in any stratagem of war”.

1. Do you see the sick irony? Your partners - kill them as soon as permitted because they are not Muslims. Can the same happen to others they have treaties with?
2. Pagans - also Arab pagans - got a very rough treatment often (though modern Muslims never mention that when talking about how well past Muslims treated non-Muslims); frequently they only got two choices: Die or become Muslims - in open violation of the Quran’s word about no compulsion in religion. A word they often like to quote today even though they know it is dead - abrogated by 2 -3 dozen later verses.
3. This verse may be one of the reasons for the Muslims’ behaviour f. ex. when conquering India (now Pakistan + India + Bangladesh) and in Africa. There were large-scale mass murders.
4. It also is a very nice word for terrorists today, as words from one situation in the Quran, normally can be used in similar situations - and as Muslim terrorists have no treaties with non-Muslims, and especially not in the West, it is just to start killing, because even if Europeans are not pagans, they are not Muslims. The same goes for their behaviour in f. ex. Darfur.

***136 9/5b: “- and lie in wait for them with any stratagem of war”.

1. The laws of war have labourouly been agreed on little by little since the battle of Solferino and before, to make war a little less inhuman. Terrorists accept not one single of the rules. The more inhuman the better often. A good religion.
2. This sentence is a clear “go ahead” for terrorists for absolutely any atrocity - in Europe or anywhere.

Nice neighbours (but just remember that only a few Muslims are that kind of neighbours - though it may at times be difficult to know which is which, and that is a problem for any non-Muslim).

***137 9/5c: Pagans - and sometimes others - often got a rough deal from Muslims. See the other parts of 9/5 just above. The choice often was: Fight and be killed or become Muslims: “But if they (the pagans, etc.) repent, and establish regular prayers (= become Muslims) and practise regular charity, then open the way for them (= let them live*)”. Muslims say that according to the Quran there is no force or compulsion used by Islam to change religion (except pressure, economy, etc. and some pogroms). But this verse say the straight opposite - though we never hear it quoted by Muslims, for some reason or other. But this verse is from as late as 631 AD. According to Islam’s rules if two or more verses “collide”, the newest of them is the right one and the older ones are invalidated. And this verse preaches: Kill them unless they become Muslims. What is a poor non-Muslim to believe? Especially as we know Muslims under some circumstances are permitted to lie for non-Muslims.

138 9/12: “But if they (the leaders in Mecca*) violate their oath after their covenant - - - fight ye the chiefs of the Unfaithful - - -”. Well, for once Muhammad has a valid reason according to the laws of war: A broken covenant may be a reason for resumed war. This is shortly after taking Mecca, and he does not quite trust the old rulers (but the covenant was not broken, and there was no more war over Mecca).

**139 9/14a: “Fight them (the “unbelievers”*), and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them - - -”. When you fight non-Muslims, you are doing the work of the good and benevolent god Allah.

Some religion: Hating, fighting, stealing, plundering, raping, enslavement, and murdering are the work of the god.

And remember: The “ethics” in the Quran was for then, for now and for ever - for us and for our children and our descendants for all future.

“What a wonderful world!” to quote Louis Armstrong.

But why does an omnipotent god need humans for doing the killing and suppression?

*140 9/14a: “(Allah will*) help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of the Believers”. To murder or mass murder non-Muslims in battle or other ways - remember that Muslims are ordered to “lie in wait for them with any stratagem of war” (9/5) - will heal the breasts of the good Muslims.

It seems us that Muslims living according to the Quran may be not the best of neighbours. (But again: Remember that only a minority live according to these parts of that book - though our dangerous difficulty is that it often is impossible to know who is who).

141 9/16: “Or think ye that ye shall be abandoned, as though Allah did not know those among you who strive with their might and main (“strive with your might and main” is an expression you meet many times in the Quran - it simply means fight in war*)”. Rest assured; Allah will help you in war - and give you Paradise when you die. War religions often have this kind of pep talks and of “happy end” - just think about Thor and the Valhalla.

*142 9/19a: “Do ye make the giving of drink to pilgrims, or the maintenance of the Sacred Mosque (Kabah in Mecca*), equal to (the pious service of) those who believe in Allah and the Last Day and strive with their might and mind (see 9/16 just above*) in the cause of Allah?”

Warriors in Darfur and terrorists anywhere think they are doing a pious service by killing and murdering - - and gang raping like in Darfur and other places where it is more like normal wars, not hit and run - and of course stealing and robbing for “good and lawful” reward also in this world.

Yes, a good and human religion.

And some future for non-Muslims - one place in the Quran the warriors are reminded that there are places with rich spoils of war not taken yet.

**143 9/19b: “They (Muslims doing good deeds*) are not comparable in the sight of Allah (with the ones killing/waging war for Allah*)”. Terrorists and others using weapons and murdering for Allah, are the best Muslims.

Guess if verses like these do their work on some single-minded or fanatic Muslims. Who said “there are verses in the Quran that can be disused for war and terror”? It hardly is possible to be a really pious Muslim without using weapons against non-Muslims.

***144 9/20a: “Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with their might and main (= fight with weapons*), in Allah’s cause, with their goods and their persons (= fighting personally in war or terrorism - “any stratagem of war”*), have the highest rank in the sight of Allah - - -”.

Terrorists (- "any atrategm of war" -) and other warriors are doubtlessly the very best Muslims.

In possible future times of troubles - remember that Muslims are ordered to make Islam the dominant religion and to suppress the members of all other religions - the few (? - 30% of Muslims “understands why terrorists do what they do“ according to international polls, tough that number varies some*) Muslims living according to the highest “ethics” for Muslims, will make a powerful and efficient 5. column in the West and other places. That is a simple military and security fact.

*145 9/20b: “- - - they (terrorists/warriors*) are the people who will achieve (salvation)”. At least the Quran is honest about some things - just like Hitler was in “Mein Kampf” - - - and few did believe Hitler until it was too late.

*146 9/21: “Their (terrorists/warriors*) Lord (Allah*) doth give them glad tidings of a Mercy (that terrorists/warriors for Allah are forgiven practically any sin*) from Himself (from Allah personally*), of His good pleasure (for the fighting and murdering they have done for the good and kind god*), and the Gardens for them, wherein are delights (earth like riches and women*) that endures”. The ultimate pep talk for war, terror and murder? In the name of a presumably peaceful religion and a kind and good god?

*147 9/22: “They (terrorists/warriors*) will live therein (in paradise) for ever. Verily in Allah’s presence is a reward, the greatest (of all)”. Warriors/terrorists are in so high esteem in the eyes of Allah, that they will be invited to live in the parts of paradise that has Allah’s presence. (In the Muslim paradise some parts are even better than others - Jesus f. ex. only lives in the 2. heaven, whereas Moses was a better prophet and lives in heaven number four, and top prophets like Abraham and Muhammad of course in number seven, closest to Allah, who resides above number seven. In addition some regions of the heavens are better than others.

Compared to 9/21 this may be an even more ultimate pep talk.

***148 9/24: “If (your closest family or closest relatives*) are dearer to you than Allah, or His Messenger (Muhammad*), or the striving (waging war*) in His (Allah’s*) cause - then wait until Allah brings his Decision (- he will punish you*)”. Islam is a religion of extremes. Nothing - NOTHING - can be permitted to mean more for you than Muhammad - and war for Islam - on this earth, and Allah in the possible next.

149 9/25-26: “And Allah did help you in many battlefields and on the day of the Hunayn - - -”. Of course a god of war helps his warriors in battle - good pep talk. The battle at Hunayn in 630 AD is specially mentioned. This battle the Muslims were on the point of loosing in spite of heavily outnumbering the enemy, when the battle-hardened core of Muhammad’s army plus the reality of 3 times as many warriors, finally manage to turn the tide of the battle - but for the morals of the large number of fresh warriors, it of course was better psychology to explain that it was Allah who - as usual - wanted the Muslims to win, and sent down an army of invisible angles fighting together with the Muslims.

150 ***9/29: “Fight those who believe not in Allah - - -.”A most clear order - - - in spite of “no compulsion in religion” (2/256).

151 9/37: “- - - and fight the Pagans all together as they fight you all together (even in the four holy months of old Arabia and of Islam*)”. As long as Muhammad talked about real self-defence, this is ok. When they started wars and fought in holy months (or plundered caravans as highway men) - even at pretexts - they broke their own rules. (Muslims recon a year to be 12 moons - not 12 months. Because of that, the Muslim year is shorter than an international year (ca. 11 days shorter - and 100 normal years = ca. 103 Muslim years)), and consequently the Muslim months drift compared to the international calendar. Because of that also the time of the holy months vary from one normal year to the next - though in the old time the pagan Arabs had leap months. Another effect is that the years run a little quicker in Islam than in the rest of the world. F. ex. there will be more than 1400 (ca. 1442) Muslim years between 622 AD and 2022 AD.)

152 9/38: “O ye who believe! What is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the Cause of Allah (= to go to war*), ye cling heavily to the earth. Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter?” A very rhetoric question it is very difficult for a really pious Muslim not to answer “no” to. And also a question that tells a lot about Islam.

***153 9/39: “Unless ye go forth (in war/battle*), He (Allah*) will punish you with a grievous penalty (normally in the Quran a synonym for Hell*) - - -”. An order not possible to misunderstand for a pious - or fanatic - Muslim.

Yes, a religion built on peace, goodness and heavenly ethics.

154 9/40: “If ye help not (your Leader (then Muhammad - today any religious leader?*)), (it is no matter (for Allah helps*)).” This is said partly on a special background, but like so many places in the Quran, it may mean all Muslims at any time.

**155 9/41: “Go ye forth (in war/battle*) (whether equipped) lightly of heavily, and strive and struggle (= fight*) with your goods and your person (= personally*), in the cause of Allah”. An order not possible to misunderstand - not even in as peaceful a religion as Islam.

**156 9/44: “Those who believe in Allah and the Last Day ask for no exemption from striving with their goods and persons (= waging war*)”.

If you are a real Muslim, you do not refrain from going to war.

157 9/44: “And Allah knowes well those (the Muslims going to war*) who do their duty”. It is not possible to deny - like most Muslims and many politically correct others try to do today - that war (against “unbelievers”) is a duty for Muslims. It is impossible to say it more directly than the Quran does here.

***158 9/45: “Only those ask for exemption (from doing battle*) who believe not in Allah and the right day”. Terrorists and fanatical mullahs/imams are right and do right according to the Quran.

159 9/46: “If they (the ones reluctant to go to war*) had intended to come out (to the battlefield*), they should certainly have made some preparations therefore; but Allah was averse to their being sent forth, so he made them lag behind - - -”. Pep talk about the ones not wanting to go to war; ‘do not mind them - they are bad quality Allah did not want’ - no reason to loose your nerve.

160 9/47: “But Allah knoweth well those who do wrong (= those not wanting to go to war*)”. The terrorists are right: It is not the terrorists who do wrong, it is the ones reluctant to murder and kill and fight. Really a religion for peace and goodness.

161 9/49: “(Some say*) ‘Grant me exception (from going to war*) and draw me not into trial’. Have they not fallen into trial already?” The Muslims not wanting war are already judged and doomed.

162 9/51: “Nothing will happen to us except what Allah has decreed for us - - -”. To do battle is not more deadly than sleeping in your bed, as Allah already has decided your hour of death. Naïve and uneducated people and religious fanatics may really believe this - in those cases it is one terrific piece of pep talk for doing battle.

***163 9/52: “Can you expect for us (any fate) other than one of the two glorious things - (martyrdom or victory)?”

A warrior or terrorist can only win.

Well, he may become an invalid f. ex. and live a long life in misery - but that is never mentioned. Also his family may live in misery - also never mentioned.

Also the Quran NEVER mentions that the non-Muslims are humans or what the devastation of their culture and lives means to them - it is of absolutely no consequence and without the slightest interest. The destruction of Persia - and for that case the East Roman culture or the terror in Pakistan/India - represented long series of terrible dramas and catastrophes for people and culture and science, but the only things that counted - and still counts - for Islam, was a lot of spoils of war - and power and riches for their leaders, and like it or not: Frequently forcing people to become Muslims - frequently by weapons, and always by social and other pressure and by extra tax, often high. Even today we have never met a Muslim able to see that side of their wars or murders or suppression, not to mention what rape and enslavement meant to millions of victims - never to this day, not one single time. Only in the western culture the ability to see that is widespread - a military weak spot, but one of the few points that perhaps makes the western culture better than some others of the big ones. (To say anything good about the West is politically incorrect, but we do not care for what is politically correct - we are able to think ourselves, and what counts is what is correct, not what is politically correct).

***164 9/73: “Strive (fight*) hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them.” Straight words for your money.

165 9/81: The ones not willing to do battle may end in hell.

166 9/83: The ones not willing to do battle are to be socially despised.

157 9/84: “Nor do thou ever pray for any of them (those that did not want to go to war*) that dies, nor stand at his grave, for they rejected Allah and (not least?*) His Messenger (Muhammad*), and died in a state of perverse rebellion.” It is perverse not to obey when Islam wants war. If not the carrot of stealing riches, taking slaves and raping women should attract the ones reluctant to go to war, then use heavy social pressure to force them. War is very essential for the Quran. And “is”, not only “was” - “is” for all future.

**168 9/85: “Allah’s plan is to punish them (the ones not wanting to go to war*) with these things in this world, and that their souls may perish in their (very) denial of Allah”. Refusing war means:

1. Social contempt.
2. To most likely end in hell.
3. To deny Allah.

Is it possible to put more social and religious pressure on a man to make him go to war - willing or not? Anyone saying Islam is peaceful, either has not read the Quran, is repeating “correct” words but wrong meanings, or is a Muslim (who believes it or not believes it).

169 9/86: “When a surah comes down, enjoining them to believe in Allah and strive and struggle (= make war*) with His Messenger (Muhammad*) - - - (some do not want to go to war - they prefer to stay with the women, not a nice reputation for an Arab in 631 AD, not to mention for a Bedouin warrior*)”. But after all not every Muslim liked – or likes – war.

170 9/88: “But the Messenger (Muhammad*), and all those who believe with him, strive and struggle with their wealth and their persons (= wage war*): for them are (all) good things (like spoils of war, slaves, women to rape, etc.*): and it is they who will prosper”

To say the least of it: Incitement to wage war for Muhammad/Islam.

171 9/89: “Allah hath prepared for them (his warriors/terrorists) Gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein: that is the supreme felicity”.

Once more - to say the least of it: Incitement to wage war for Muhammad - and for Allah if he exists.

172 9/93: “The ground (of complaint (for not wanting war*)) is against such as claim an exemption while they are rich - - -”. If you can afford to go to war - or if someone, included the leaders (see 9/92) can help you - then it is a valid reason for complaint and contempt if you do not want to go to war.

A stark contrast to NT: “Thou shallt not Kill”.

173 9/94: Do not believe the excuses from the ones not wanting to go to war - the real reason is that they are bad Muslims.

A good Muslim goes to war whenever his leaders call.

***174 9/95: “So leave them (the ones not wanting to wage war*): for they are an abomination, and Hell is their dwelling-place - a fitting recompense for the (evil) they did”. Not to hate and kill and steal and rob and rape and enslave and murder is an abomination and evil. In that way the raise of power for Muhammad and Islam would go slower?

To wage war is the absolute duty for any fit Muslim who can afford it. No misunderstanding possible.

Brave future world.

Do you still believe that Allah is the same god as the Yahweh in NT?

*175 9/96: “- - -Allah is not pleased with those who disobey (and refuse war*)”. The good, kind, wise god.

176 9/111a: “Allah hath purchased of the Believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the Garden (of Paradise) - - -”. This may be a good deal for you and for Muhammad if Allah exists and really is a bloody enough god to want this. If Allah does not exist, it ONLY is a good deal for Muhammad and his successors - and for a lot of religions there is every reason to believe the gods are made up - and the only ones who profit are the religious leaders. (For Islam this is in reality proven - no omniscient god makes that many mistakes, contradictions, etc. like what you find in the Quran).

177 9/111b: “- - - they (warriors/terrorists*) fight in His (Allah’s (or Muhammad’s?*)) cause, and slay and are slain: (and get great reward in Paradise*)”. Can anyone really read the Quran - even a Muslim - and afterwards believe the Quran represents a good, peaceful, perfect god? One is reminded of the blood orgies of the Mayas and Incas, except Islam mostly kills at the spot - like the Assyrians.

**178 9/111c: “- - - they fight in His (Allah’s*) cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran - - -”. This is not even is wrong - it is nonsense, and can only be made up by someone not knowing the Gospels. There is nothing like this in the Gospels - this even if Islam pretends the text refers to a Gospel that has disappeared (there are references to the word “sword“, but not as part of war or incitement to war). There is a theoretical possibility for that there existed an older Gospel, but this fairy tale or nightmare is not taken from that one either. Because if it ever existed, we know the contents of it, as three of the present Gospels in case used that one as their main source (the other theoretical possibility is that two of those Gospels used the oldest one as their source - in that case there is no reason to believe there ever was older Gospel, but it is to be hoped there was, because that gives an even older written source for the Bible - and makes it even more reliable according to all rules for study of history and for such science. By the way: No serious student or professor of history use the Quran as a source for happenings older than 610 AD - which tells volumes about how they evaluate the reliability of this book presumably sent down by an omniscient god).

But the real reason why it is not the slightest doubt that this is made up, is that the sentence so totally and 180 degrees oppose the very teachings of the NT - and the entire NT.

179 9/120a: “It was not fitting for the people of Medina and the Bedouin Arabs of the neighbourhood, to refuse to follow Allah’s Messenger (to wage war*) - - - “. But it is fitting for Islam to steal and rob and kill end enslave and suppress. What then about “let there be no compulsion in religion”? - or about religious wars?

And it was “fitting” to make Muhammad a powerful warlord.

180 9/120b: “It was not fitting for (them - see first part of 9/120*) to refuse to follow Allah’s Messenger, nor to prefer their own lives to his - - -”. Incitement to war. What does just this tell about Islam? And what it does tell about Muhammad and Islam is that the Quran is - not a fairy tale, but a demon tale?

And: make Muhammad a powerful warlord! Hitler said similar things (actually some intellectuals compared Nazism to Islam before WW2.)

181 9/120c: “- - - (not*) to refuse to follow (in war) Allah’s Messenger (Muhammad*), nor to prefer their lives to his: because nothing could they suffer or do, but was reckoned to their credit as a deed of righteousness - - - in the cause of Allah - - -”. A testimony of religious blindness and darkness worthy any of the most bloody pagan religions - or modern sects praying to the Devil for a god. Or the darkest sides of Nazism or communism.

182 9/120d: “- - - (suffered*) in the Cause of Allah, or trod paths to raise the ire (not in self defence*!!!) of the Unbelievers, or received any injury whatever from an enemy. For Allah suffered not the reward to be lost to those who do good - “. To wage war, with all the destruction and suffering that means, is to do good things in the eyes of Allah and Islam/the Quran.

Make your own comments. Think your own thoughts.

Allah = Yahweh in NT? Only if the god is schizophrenic.

183 9/123: “Fight the Unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know Allah is with those who fear Him (= the Muslims*)”. If "I" do not like what you do - or if "I" use a little conspiracy theories, like Muslims and especially the ones in the Middle East often do, and think you are up to bad things, you surely are girding me about, and it is "my" right according to the Holy Quran to kill you.

We do hope none of the Muslims in our neighbourhood thinks like that. The problem is that many proven Muslim terrorists also were thought to be good persons - it is not possible to know who the few are. How do you see the difference between a human and an inhuman Muslim? Like the ones who filmed victims they burned alive.

Year 632 AD, surah 5:

184: 5/33: “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad – the one they in praxis made war against on Earth*) - - - is execution, or crucifixion, or cutting off hands and feet (one hand and one foot*) on opposite sides, or exile from the land”. This was no paper decition – all too frequently mass murder of vanquished victims took place. The women and children often were made slaves, and the med killed – by the hundreds and thousands and ten thousands. Delhi in India was one of the places where the mass murder reached 100ooo. But still today Muslims talk about the brutality of the Crusaders.

185 5/35: “Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of approach unto Him, and strive with might and mind (= make war*) in His Cause: that ye may prosper”. You prosper if you do like this. Actually Islam after a few centuries (ca 1100 AD - or actually 1095 AD in the eastern and central Muslim area and ca. 1198 in the western) found that there was no prosperity in thinking and researching and studying - except studying and repeating the religion and related subjects.

186 5/54: “- - - fighting in the way of Allah - - -”. Unlike when you fight for Jesus and Yahweh with your brain and words and good deeds, when you fight for Muhammad and Allah you fight with weapons and wage war and terror - a laudable thing to do. Or?

187 5/64: “Amongst them (the Jews*) We (Allah*) have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgement. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth”. Well, the times Muhammad fought against Jewish tribes, it was Muhammad who used or made up a reason to start the fight. The same when the Muslims 6 years after Muhammad conquered Palestine (and stole/robbed it so clean that there was extensive hunger f. ex. in Jerusalem).

Year not known, surah 13:

188 13/41: “See they (non-Muslims*) not that We (Allah/Muslims*) gradually reduce the land (in their control) - - - “.

A fitting and thought provoking last verse about war and Islam/the Quran.

POST SCRIPTUM FOR CHAPTER IV/2.

Also see the post scripture to the chapter before – chapter IV/1.

Reading the Quran’s thoughts, orders, incitements, glorifying, and threats concerning Muslims’ duty to wage war, is very thought provoking.

Islam and Muslims tell and tell and tell what a good and peaceful and perfect religion Islam is. Many Muslims even honestly believe it - they have never read the whole Quran, or they are religiously blind, seeing only what they want to see. Or may be they rationalize all of it as being self defence, no matter what aggression it really was from Muslims that started it (like the war with Mecca) - words are cheap and things can be “explained”. Though from 622 AD the Quran impresses and impresses hate and stealing and rape and war.

But it is impossible that the leaders and the ones that have studied the Quran do not know it - though some weak souls may have glossed it over or let only the verses they want to see, count.

But the real, intelligent leaders know it:

The Quran does not tell about a peaceful, good, and benevolent god or religion. It tells about a religion founded on and bent on power and war and blood and the devil take - in a double meaning - the ones not strong enough to resist “our” armies and terrorists. Any tactic of war is permitted and glorified. Not only that: War is a holy duty for all Muslims - a duty that is impressed and impressed and impressed, and sweetened with promises and escuses painted black with heavy threats. Not to mention the attractive promises of “good and lawful” stealing, plundering, raping, slaves, concubines and riches in this world.

All this for a god Part II and others each proves with mathematical certainty cannot be an omniscient god. No - NO - omniscient god makes that many small and big mistakes. Absolutely no omniscient god - not even a baby dwarf god hidden somewhere in the Aldebaran region, does that. An omniscient god simply makes no mistakes at all - and in the Quran lots and lots of mistakes are plain for anyone to see, except for the religious blind.

Worse: No omniscient god would use wrong facts as “signs” or “proofs” for his existence - and especially not wrong facts or other logically invalid arguments (which there are lots and lots of in the Quran) which he had to know sooner or later would be looked through and destroy his credibility.

The same goes for all the contradictions.

No, Allah - if he exists - is proven by the Quran to be a not omniscient god. But he may be a minor one - not omniscient nor omnipotent (if he had been omnipotent he could easily have proved it, instead of using a lot of fast talk - and even fast talk that at points were psychologically wrong (f. ex. that to make a wonder or two would impress nobody)) - trying to bluff and bully his way to prominence.

He may even make it, thanks to ruthless, inhuman methods.

But a far more likely explanation is that the religion is not from a god at all. The fact that so many of the mistakes are in total accordance with what the science at that time believed, indicates very strongly that Islam is made by someone living at that time - be it Muhammad himself or some accomplice.

More facts strongly indicate the same: Surahs often appeared after a crisis had happened. A god had sent it in time to avoid the crisis. Family problems Muhammad had also were in the “much revered Mother Book” in Allah’s heaven. Think of a holy book - so holy that it is highly revered by a god - that is made by a god or even has existed from eternity - discussing Muhammad’s problems with his women, or scolding his personal petty enemies (surah 111) - - - and laugh.

And according to Islam there have been 124ooo prophets and messengers throughout time. But nearly all the Mother Book is made for Arabia and Muhammad. What about all the others? - only a very few have got any guidance, or are mentioned at all. Normally the first prophets would need most guidance. In the presumed Mother Book nearly only Arabia and Muhammad matters.

But if Muhammad or a helper made it up - like many other makers of new sects or religions - everything suddenly fit and make sense.

The same if it is made up by dark forces - except that not even a devil would make all those mistakes, etc., simply because he had to know he sooner or later would be found out and lose his - or her - credability.

Muhammad was intelligent enough for such a job, and as a former salesman he knew a lot about people. Add enough ruthlessness and desire for power + some luck, and that is it.

But if that is the explanation, what then about all the Muslims if there exists another, true, religion?

At least these chapters (the mistakes, the Mega Mistakes, the war/incitements to war, and the incitements to dislike/hate and discrimination) should be printed, as a book or a booklet reaches much farther in some societies than Internet - too many have no access. For “normal” print shops it may be too dangerous to do it. But underground printers - or printers with special themes - it should be possible. The danger by printing it tells volumes about Islam: Their arguments are not stronger than they have to terrorize and kill to “defend” what they want to believe - and especially to deny and refuse any questions about the religion’s weak spot: Muhammad - a rather dubious man who proclaimed himself to be an infallible prophet (like many others have done). And it tells many more volumes about a possible future where Islam dominates Earth - a black, bleak, stagnant earth dominated by brutal suppression from “big brother”- or like under Hitler or Stalin or Mao or Gingis Khan - at times with pogroms even like under Pol Pot - or under al-Qaida or under Turkey for the Armenians.

If you run the risk, just go ahead and print it - parts of the book (f. ex. these first chapters or the chapters about Jihad ot the mistakes) or add the chapters about Muslim points of view on unbelievers or the entire book. But be careful and take precautions. Like Hitler and Stalin and Mao, Islam is goodness worn like a thin disguise sometimes.

“EIN UMMAH, EIN BELIEF, EIN FUHRER!”. (Ummah = Muslim nation).

There also is one fact people should beware of: This perfect religion is trying to make the United Nations make it an international law that it is prohibited to “insult other religions’ prophets” - we think they also include religious symbols. Of all prophets and religious symbols in the world, only Muhammad needs such a law - and that law must be so wide and so vague that also full truths about him will be prohibited - he was really a rather dubious character, but on this dubious character all Islam rests.

If we permit such a law to pass UN, you can be 100% sure that anything that is not flattering the - according to the propaganda - saintly Muhammad, will be defined as insult or slander to Muhammad and prohibited by Islam. Even if you like us just quote Islam itself (but without the glossing over the harsh reality).

Resist that law whatever religion you belong to.

Added 2009: Too late - Islam succeded in UN.

Raw manuscript finished: Jan. 16. 2009.

NB: If you find any mistakes anywhere, please inform us. If it is a real mistake, it will be corrected.

NB, NB, NB:

1. Read first the 2 small chapters in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" about "Some Essentials for how the Quran is to be read and understood" (VII-10-1-0) and "The Quran is to be understood literally if nothing else is indicated" (VII-10-2-0).

2. www.1000mistakes.com is blocked by many Muslim authorities. To debate with persons in such areas, cut and paste what you want from the pages and send it under titles different from www.1000mistakes.com .

3. www.1000mistakes.com is one of 9 pages which Muslim organisetions warned especially against in 2008 and 2009 - it could make especially procelytes lose their belief in Islam; correct and "down-to-the-earth" information works. In this connection it is worth noting that in the "warning" www.1000mistakes.com was one of 3 which neither was accused of bringing wrong facts, nor of being a hate page.

4. Comment 141 (to verse 6/149) in “The Message of the Quran” (see point 5) explains (translated from Swedish) about Allah's claimed omniscience vs. man's claimed free will:

“With other words: The real connection between Allah’s knowledge about the future (and consequently about the unavoidable in what is to happen in the future*) on one side and man’s relatively (!!*) free will on the other – two statements that seems to contradict each other – lies outside what is possible for humans to understand, but as both statement are made from Allah (in the Quran*) both must be true”. Unbelievable. Blind belief is the only correct and intelligent way of life, even in the face of the utterly impossible!!

5. And an afterthought: In the book “The Message of the Quran”, certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy in Cairo (one of the 2-3 top universities in the Muslim world on such subjects) in a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. An additonal point here is that if there is no proof for Allah and impossible to prove him, automatically there also is no proof for, and impossible to prove Muhammad's claimed connection to a god. And if there is no Allah and/or no connection between Muhammad and a god, what then is Muhammad? - and what than is Islam? - a made up, invalid religion?

6. Further: All the mistakes, contradictions, etc. in that book prove 100% that the Quran is not made by an omniscient god - no god makes such and so many mistakes, etc. If then Islam is a made up religion, what then about all the Muslims who have been prohibitted from looking for a real religion (if such one exists)? And where will they in case wake up after living and practising such an inhuman war religion like Islam is according to the Quran (and to Hadiths), if there is a second life somewhere? - Hell or Paradise?

7. NB and PS: No matter how sure you are about something, if it is not proved, it is not knowledge, only belief or strong belief, and can be wrong. Only what is proved or possible to prove is knowledge.

(As www.1000mistakes.com - included this part about jihad/"holy war" - is blocked in many Muslim areas - which shows they are afraid of it and lack arguments (if they had real arguments for that www.1000mistakes.com is wrong, blocking it was unneccessary) - "cut and paste" whatever you want from it and send if you want to inform or to debate there. Remember to omit the name www.1000mistakes.com).

PS: If we are blocked centrally - f. ex. by spam (there is too much at times already from unfriendly sources) we will re-open with new address somewhere else, and announce the new address om f. ex. www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam. Also if your comments to us do not reach us, any comments posted on a thread with "1000 mistakes" in the title on that forum will be read by us - it is a big international debate page. We cannot answer on that page, though, as it is not safe enough - we have had death threaths; better to kill an opponent, than to check if a religion brainwashed into you only on the word of a man who even practised lies (f. ex. "war is deceit") and advocated breaking even your oaths if that gave a better result, is true ot made up - old beliefs are hard to question.

Please inform all and everybody and all relevant fora - f. ex. Internet pages for debate or information - about the address www.1000mistakes.com. It is information that is urgently needed by many, not least by Muslims. No god made a book with so many mistakes and other wrongs - and if the Quran and Islam are made up by humans or dark forces, where are the followers of this inhumanly dark and brutal war religion heading for in a possible next life?