A N   A B C   T O   T H E   Q U R A N



(The Quran and its proveably made up religion.)





Ch.   1   Forword and contents.

Ch.   2   The reason for the reasons.

Ch.   3   The 13 proofs.

Ch.   4   How should we look at the Quran, etc., etc.?

Ch.   5   The Quran, war, terrorism, etc.

Ch.   6   Heaven and Hell in the Quran.

Ch.   7   Are there parallels between the Quran and Hitler's "Mein Kampf"?

Ch.   8   Go for the root or for the branches?

Ch.   9   The history of Allah.

Ch. 10   The creation and the universe according to the Quran.

Ch. 11   Muhammadan claimed prophets from Adam and up.

Ch. 12   The history of Mecca.

Ch. 13   The history of the Quran.

Ch. 14   The history of the Kabah.

Ch. 15   The history of Muhammad.

Ch. 16   A timeline of Muhammad.

Ch. 17   Muhammad in the Bible?

Ch. 18   Jesus in the Quran.

Ch. 19   Jerusalem.

Ch. 20   Muhammad's (claimed) Night Ride.

Ch. 21   Muhammad lying in the Quran.

Ch. 22   Lawful dishonesty in the Quran.

Ch. 23   A timeline of Islam after Muhammad.

Ch. 24   Muhammadan wars in Europe.

Ch. 25   Is the Bible falsified?

Ch. 26   The Quran in the Bible? The Bible in the Quran?

Ch. 27   When codes of moral collide.

Ch. 28   Muhammadan mulatto babies murdered by their fathers.

Ch. 29   Slaves in the Quran.

Ch. 30   Women - and sex varieties - in the Quran.

Ch. 31   Halal slaughtering.

Ch. 32   Muhammadan holy site in Jerusalem?

Ch. 33   Jerusalem the capital of Israel?

Ch. 34   Alexander the Great in the Quran(!!!)

Ch. 35   Claiming equality between Christianity and Islam?

Ch. 36   Teaching Bible in schools?

Ch. 37   Some black facts - a short resume.

Ch. 38   The unbelievable(?) Jew + Israel.

Ch. 39   Why do the churches - and media - fail themselves, their followers, and others?

Ch. 40    Ways of thinking.

Ch. 41   A question in a newspaper.

Ch. 42   Some central claims you will meet.

Ch. 43   Why are negative facts about Islam automatically Islamophobia?

Ch. 44   The (negative) Sum of the Quran. A short resume.

Ch. 45   Perhaps we should use the correct names?

Ch. 46   Post Scripture




Before you start reading:


Things are seriously wrong with the Quran and thus with Islam, but remember that most of the believers are just as human as everybody else. International science tells that in times of peace, only some 2.5% of the Muhammadans (the correct name as it proveably is not true that the Quran is the words from a god, and "the believers" thus only are followers of Muhammad, not of a god) are or may become dangerous - namely the 2.5% who accept the use of violence as a working tool.


In this book we will put light on several of the black points in the Quran and in Islam. There are many of them, and some are from serious to very serious, but all the same: Please do remember that the great majority of the Muhammadans are just as human as you and me. They just are mislead by their parents, by their surroundings, by their imams and mullahs, by the Quran and other religious books and medias based on the Quran - ways of misleading Muhammadans name "taqlid" when talking about other religions, not aware of that the situation is just the same in Islam.


Just a few days ago (June 2018 AD) another scientific study was published, showing that across the world 23% of the ones who officially are Muhammadans,  do not believe in Islam. They all the same stay in the religion for reasons from laziness and convenience to fear. We have not seen any scientific numbers for the rest, but a number we sometimes meet, is that 70% (included the 23%) of the Muhammadans are totally ok, whereas the remaining some 27.5% may be anything from slightly sympathetic to "the case", to active helpers (but only helpers, not terrorists, etc. themselves).


But you should also beware that it will never be possible to get permanently rid of Muhammadan terrorism, until the proofs for that it is not true that the Quran is the words of a god, is thoroughly spread all over the world. As long as people believe the Quran and its strong incitements to apartheid, racism, violence, suppression, and blood ideology, really is from a god, those points are too central and too strong in the Quran and in Islam, for anything else to put a permanent end to it. The Quran's open rules for dishonesty in words and deeds, enlarge the problems.


There are some problems - and serious ones - f.x.:

1. It too often is impossible to know who are or will become dangerous, and this costs lives - mostly innocent lives. And this for a provably made up "religion".

2. It is totally impossible to know who of the descendants of even the best and most human Muhammadans, who in the future will  become dangerous - one of them my rape or kill my or your great granddaughter.

3. Muhammadans - at least 1. and 2. generation immigrants - seem to be over-represented when it comes to crime. F.x. German medias a few days ago (June 2018) reported that in one year (2015-2016 if we remember correctly) crime had grown by 10%, and that 90% of that growth were because of male Muhammadan such ones. There may be a connection between this and the (im)moral codes plus the disrespect for all "infidels" in the Quran.

4. 2.5% of 1.6 billion Muhammadans after all makes 40 million dangerous or potentially dangerous persons.


There thus are realistic reasons for being afraid. And as it is impossible to know who will are or will become dangerous, there also are realistic reasons for being careful. To prevent is better than to try to repair or try to comfort the victims afterwards - or to try to resurrect the dead ones, adults and children.


One more point: Do not use hate speech or deeds. That is counterproductive, partly because it is so easy and natural for them to dismiss it as "just hate", and partly because when they dismiss your hate, they automatically also dismiss the rest of what you say or do, included the facts you try to tell them. Instead read this book, read other books, read the Quran (but with your eyes open and your brain and knowledge active), seek knowledge also in other ways - and then try to bring the sad facts about the Quran and Islam across to them in ways they cannot so easily dismiss.



One small piece of advice: The first time you read this book, do not check the references, tables, etc., as this will "chop up" the reading too much, and make it more difficult to get an overview and to grasp the contents. Plan to read it 2 times, and do such checking the 2. time.


And an NB:  Parts of this book are from articles I have had in media or other debates. Because of that some topics will be touched more than one time, but from different angels, and in different contexts. We have left it like this also partly because if you want to use the texts as a kind of "lexicon" - f.x. you want to know more about the topic "Jesus in the Quran" - you shall find the essentials in the relevant chapter, and not have to "leaf" back and forth too much.



Chapter 1:



Both the Quran and Islam claim that Islam is the original religion all over the world, that there always since Adam were Muhammadan prophets, that there never anywhere in the world had been a people who have not had such prophets, and that every prophet had receiver a copy of "The Mother of the Book" (=  "The Mother of the Quran") - the same book the Quran is claimed to be a copy of, and a book claimed to be so perfect that it is very respected by Allah and his angels, and so perfect and without errors, that the very perfection is a 100% for that it is from an omniscient god - but that bad people wanting a better/more money life here on Earth, had falsified it into the Bible and other religious books or teachings. (Please read the Quran and see all its wrong facts, other non-religious errors, contradictions, helpless logic, unclear points, etc. Are you able to believe that an omniscient god would deeply respect such a product?)


Islam never explains what prophets or messengers who lived before man learnt how to read some 3200-3300 BC, f.x. Adam(!) and Noah, used their copies for.


And neither the Quran, nor Islam, explain how f.x. the Bible, which demands utter honesty in words and deeds, could give its followers more money than the Quran, which accepts - yes, in some cases even promotes - the use of dishonesty in both words (lawful use of lies and even the disuse or breaking of words and oaths (fx. 2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2), cheating,etc.) and deeds (lawful stealing, looting, extortion - and slave taking) + lawful rape). Actually both the Quran and Hadiths indicate that you can strike it rich from stealing/looting when taking part in raids and wars for Muhammad/Islam. But never a word about the price the victims had and have to pay for this. There NEVER in the entire Quran is any sympathy for human victims who are not Muhammadans.


In spite of what both the Quran and Islam claims about the age of Islam - the original and standard religion from Adam and up - and the of Quran, neither science nor Islam has ever found one single trace from neither a god like the Muhammadan Allah, a religion of dishonesty, apartheid, racism, war, and power greed like Islam, or a book like the Quran, older than 610 AD, when Muhammad started his teaching (actually he started in earnest in 613 AD). A 100% proof: If any proved such trace had ever been found, Islam had SCREAMED about it. No such scream is heard. For comparison: Science knows at least 100ooo (literally speaking) traces - of them tens of thousands scriptures, fragments, quotes from, references to - from other old religions, from before 610 AD.


100ooo : 0 tell a story. One of the many proofs for that something is seriously wrong the Quran and with Islam.


Allah in a way is an old god. The first science knows about him, he was the main god "further east" - Iraq and that area. He likely was brought to Arabia by early immigrants. There he became the moon god "al-Ilah" (which simply means "the god"). Later the name drifted to the easier to pronounce "al-Lah". His symbol, the crescent moon, is from this time.


At the time of Muhammad he had become the main god in large parts of Arabia, and the even easier name to pronounce, "Allah" sometimes was used.


Enter Mohammad. According to f.x. Hadith, al-Bukhari, Mohammed was medium tall, had broad shoulders, a somewhat curly hair, and with rose (in old Arabic lingo, this often means light brown) complexion. He also was an utterly handsome man, according to al-Bukhar.i (But the hadiths - the second main source Islam is built on - were written 250-300 years after things were said or done, and may be "colored". It is very clear that many of the points in hadits are untrue. F.x. the Quran states as an absolute that Mohammad was unable to foresee the future or to make miracles, but in the hadiths there are hundreds of points claiming or indicating foreseeing or miracles done by or related to Mohammad. Yes, much is wrong also in the hadits.) Either the Quran lies when it states that Mohammad was unable to foresee the future or make miracles, or Hadiths lies about this. (If Muhammad really had made valid foretelling or real miracles, be sure it had been mentioned in the Quran. And be even more sure that the Quran had not stated that he was unable to foresee the future or make miracles, like both it and Islam do, if this was not the reality. The claimed miracles and foretelling you find in hadiths or claimed from Muhammadans, thus are made up ones, also according to the Quran's clear statements that Muhammad was unable to do such things.)


He was born in or around 670 AD. There was nothing much special about him until he was some 40, in 610 AD. That year he started to claim (it was never proved) that he got messages from the old Arab main god, al-Lah - Mohammad only used the name Allah, and he claimed that Allah was not the main god, but the only god - and that Allah was the same god as the Jewish and Christian god Yahweh/God. Also these claims never were proved, and when it comes to the claim Allah = Yahweh, this simply is wrong, as the teachings and moral codes, etc. of the two (claimed) gods, are too different, and too deeply different. (Remember here that the "explanation" Islam uses for the differences - that the Bible is falsified - provably is wrong. There may be some errors also in the Bible, too, though far from as bad as in the Quran, but provably no falsifications. (Guess if Islam had screamed if they had found even one proved falsification! No such screams are heard. Many claims, but never a proof.))


Science strongly suspects that Mohammad got TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. This is a brain illness which can give just such religious "experiences" like Mohammad claimed he got. The fact that science indicates that Mohammad perhaps believed in his own claims in the beginning, but later became more "rational" about it, and without scruples used it for his own purpose, may strengthen that suspicion: At first he perhaps did not understand what happened, and believed a god was involved, but over a few years understood that this could give him respect, power, and money for bribes - and women - the 4 things both the Quran and Hadiths make ever so clear Mohammad wanted: Respect, obedience/power, riches to "buy" - bribe - more respect, obedience/power, and women (he had not 9 or 11 women, like Muhammadans often claim, but at least 36 known by name - also at least 2 rapes (Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay + the slave Marieh and the child Aishah hardly had free choices).


He met with little success the first years. Until 622 AD he only got a hundred or so followers, and many of them had fled to East Africa.


In 622 AD Mohammad himself had to flee, and fled to a town further north, named Yathrib, later renamed Medina. There he started as a highway man and robber  baron, and later warlord. And stolen riches - and permission for all Muhammadans to take part and steal/rob themselves rich - made things start to happen. (NB: Islam does not admit that this at least was a large part of the reason for Muhammad's sudden success.) It also is very clear from the Quran, and even more so from Hadiths, that Mohammad used such riches, and even more so the permission for the warriors to steal/rob, rape, take slaves, etc., for bribes to "secure" not strong believers, and to "buy" or recruit new ones.


If you read the words about Mohammad in the Quran (dictated by himself - perhaps(?) relayed from Allah like claimed(?)), you meet a very nice, honest, and reliable man. The same in hadiths - told by mouth by his followers (who wished him to be top quality in all aspect of life), and many of them clearly or provably untrue (f.x. all his foretelling and miracles told in the hadits, are untrue also according to the Quran, which clearly states that Mohammad could not foresee the future or make miracles).


If you on the other hand skip the flowering words, and instead read his deeds, demands, and moral code, etc., you at least after 622 AD meet a very hard, self centered, scheming, and bloody man - at least partly "inhuman". Quite similar to f.x. the leaders of IS, Boko Haram, al-Chabaab, etc. today.


As for his moral code: It tells something about human nature that Islam and all believing Muhammadans are able to believe that a man with such a view on the use of lies and other kinds of dishonesty, not also could cheat his followers a little - or more. As much is told about human naivety, nature, and ability to believe what one wants to believe, by Islam's and all the Muhammadans' ability to for one thing make up more or less believable "explanations" to explain all wrong facts, etc., etc. in the Quran away, in spite of that Allah(?) in the Quran states that he gives the best and perfect explanations, and not least by their ability to believe in these "explanations". (They HAVE to believe in it, or face the fact that no omniscient god ever delivered such a sorry quality like the Quran = it is not true that the Quran is from a god = the Quran is made up by someone else, likely by Mohammad, but perhaps by the Devil (some of the moral codes may indicate the Devil - though not even a devil would make so many errors, contradictions, etc., like one finds in the Quran) = Islam is a made up religion - and a religion of dishonesty and inhumanity.


The 2. most central prophets in Islam, is Abraham, and number 3 Jesus. Both of course were believing Muhammadans, at least according to the Quran and to Islam, centuries before Mohammad started Islam, and centuries before the oldest traces from Islam, which all are from after 610 AD. Believe the claims if you are able to.


Abraham is not very active in the book, but mostly stays in the background as the claimed forefather of the Arabs (via Ishmael, whom Islam claims settled in Mecca), and as the one who rebuilt of Adam's and Noah's Kabah.


As for being the forefather of the Arabs:

1. The provably not falsified Bible tells that Hagar and her son Ishmael settled "near the border of Egypt" = east of where the Suez Canal now runs, and when OT was written some 800-500 BC = much more than 1000 years before Mohammad, there was no reason for not telling the truth about where they settled.

2. The same Bible gives a rough overview over Abraham's travels. He was never near Arabia, according to that book.

3. To feed his large group - the Bible mentioned that he once raised 318 men, and there had to be women and children in addition = at least 1ooo all together - his flocks of cows, sheep, goats, and horses (he had no camels) had to be huge. It would be insanity to take all these animals + his family and people to a dead desert valley where there was no water for anybody and no grass for the animals. It thus is not true that Abraham lived there even for a short time, when he sent away Hagar and the some 15 years old Ishmael. Abraham lived in Sinai and in what is now South Israel.

4. Science tells: The Mecca valley "was so dead and desert, that it was not possible to make a living there until the caravan trades passing through the valley, had started so one could live from trade". = Not possible to make a living there until many centuries after Abraham and Ishmael, and even then not from grassing animals.

5. Science straight out says: "It is highly unlikely Abraham ever visited Arabia" (not to mention the Mecca Valley).

6. DNA indicates that the Arabs and the Jews split as groups well before 2ooo-1800 BC = when Abraham and Ishmael lived (if they are not made up fantasy), and thus that the splitting happened long before Ishmael. The simple mathematics: If the groups Arabs and Jews split before Abraham - who lived(?) 2ooo-1800 BC - Abraham cannot be the forefather to both groups. And the Jews have a much stronger claim on him than the Arabs.

7. A further point on this is that science tells that the Arabs are not a coherent group with one forefather, but the descendants from a mix of people who drifted into the peninsula when it was settled thousands of years before Abraham. (The first groups along the coasts some 130ooo - 106ooo years ago, but more heavy immigration from around or before 5ooo BC, though still mainly along the coasts, and then by people from all around. (The interior was not settled until after the dromedary - the local camel - was domesticated.) To quote Encyclopedia Britannica: "Arabia has been inhabited by innumerable tribal units". Like said: Not originally a coherent group. And even less so later because of mainly large import of sex slaves.



As for rebuilding Adam's Kabah - destroyed by the Big Flood according to Islam - in Mecca: The Quran and Islam claim that Abraham and Ishmael rebuilt the Kabah during visits Abraham paid Ishmael later. In addition to the just mentioned points:

1. How did they - 2 men is all that is indicated - get the stones and transport them to the temple?

2. Who had taught them - Abraham a nomad, Ishmael with unclear job - how to form the stones into building blocks? - and how much time would that take for a relatively big building?

3. How did they manage to lift the building blocks onto the slowly higher walls?

4. The Bible tells that Abraham built a few altars during his life, likely from natural stones - that is all which is mentioned. Who taught him how to construct big buildings - far bigger than Ishmael and his family + the sporadic visitor Abraham would ever need?

5. MUHAMMADAN archeology a few years ago told that the oldest traces from permanent settlement in and around Mecca is from the 3. century AD - more than 2ooo years after Abraham and Ishmael, and that the oldest part of the Kabah is from around  400 AD, and both built by immigrants from Yemen.

6. Hadiths tell that the Kabah was rebuilt during the time of Muhammad (and that the young Mohammad took part in that). But it was rebuilt smaller than the earlier one - the one claimed to be from Abraham - because it would be too expensive to rebuild it full size. If the Quran's and Islam's claims that Abraham and Ishmael rebuilt it earlier, this means that Abraham was richer than the entire and rich Mecca at the well off time of Muhammad, and that the two needed a bigger temple than the prosperous city Mecca needed later.

7. The Kabah originally likely was built by the "king" or Tubba named Asad abu Karb,  who ruled ca. 390 - 420 AD, and built in the style of the star and moon temples the immigrants were used to from home. (They came from Yemen.)

8. The "Black Stone" likely was added around 490 AD, and likely imported from Yemen.


Jesus is a bit more active in the Quran - and mainly he is a copy of Mohammad in words and deeds, except for honesty and war, etc. Jesus was the main competitor to Muhammad, so that even if he is number 3 in Islam, he is played down not a little - he f.x. ends up in the 2. Heaven, far below Muhammad who was promised the 7. one, and closest to Allah. All the same it is Jesus the dead ones first meet in the claimed next life, and it is Jesus who shall be the sign of the Day of Doom ((43/61) according to the Quran.


There also is a funny small fact concerning Jesus and the Quran/Islam:

Jesus really was not named Jesus. Jesus was a Hebrew, and had the Hebrew name Joshua. The Arab version of this name is Yushuwa (the spelling may vary a little when transcribed  from Arab to Latin alphabet).


But when the Gospels later were written, they were written in Greek, and the Greek version of the name Joshua - Jesus - was  used. Because of this he became known to the world as Jesus.


But the Quran and Islam do not use the name "Yushuwa", but instead "Isa". BUT "ISA" IS THE ARAB VERSION OF THE NAME "ESAU"! Thus the Quran and Arabs speak a lot about Esau, but little about Jesus when reading or talking in Arab!


Comments necessary? - except that few omniscient gods would make such stupid errors.


Another point: Hadith states that Mohammad told the Quran was sent down i 7 different versions, all of which were correct. It is not explained how the Quran can be the only correct words of Allah, if there existed 7 different versions - words - of the texts. It

also is not explained how 7 versions all can be the one and only correct one. Further: When the Quran finally was "canonized" in the version of Caliph Uthman around 650-656 AD, it was written in a very incomplete Arab alphabet, and because of that very many point were unclear (650 or more points). Thus when the "original" was copied later and in a complete alphabet, it very often was - and still is - a guesswork what a word or meaning really was meant. Even today there thus is not only one Quran. There are 24 versions accepted by Islam, 6 of which are in daily use around the world, with the versions Asim after Hafs and Nafi after Warsh as the 2 dominant ones (and even between these there according to Internet are 1337 points where the texts differs). Which one, if any, is the exact and correct words of Allah?


The last 10 years of his life Muhammad had a lot of success - and every now and then new verses from Allah. Often verses which fit the situation Muhammad was in, or backed him up. "Your god is quick at satisfying you", one of Muhammad's wives once told him.


The texts first were memorized by men trained in remembering, but later jotted down on palm leaves, bits of bone, skin,  etc. From these Caliph Uthman not later than 656 AD (when he was murdered - of the first 11 caliphs of "the Religion of Peace", 10 were murdered) had made an official version of the book. But like mentioned the Arab alphabet at that time was so incomplete, that it made trouble later.


Even if it had not been proved that it is not true that the Quran is the words of a god, thus even if the words from Muhammad had been exactly correct understood by Uthman, it is highly unlikely any of the present versions is correct. Thus even if Muhammad really had got messages and quoted them correctly, Islam had been at least partly off or far off the teaching of a claimed god named Allah, as they do not know which - if any - of the many versions of the Quran is the correct one.




Muslims who read this: Remember the difference between "Reading, mode 1", and "Reading, mode 2":


"Reading, mode 1": You believe you know something, and are only searching for and accept points strengthening your belief, and discarding everything else as untrue, falsification, etc. The rest is wrong, made up, conspiracy, etc. and pushed aside.

"Reading, mode 2": You search for facts, and honestly try to find the truth.


There is far too much "Reading, mode 1" in Islam.





What I dislike most about the Quran and Islam? Strangely enough not the apartheid, racism, terror, and war and blood, but the dishonesty - the rules for "lawful lies" (al-Taqiyya), "lawful half-truths" (Kitman), lawful pretending or circumventing (Hilah) - built on points like 4/142, 8/30, 10/21, 13/42, 27/50, 86/15-16 (when Allah can make "clever" plans, this of course is no sin and ok also for his believers), lawful decite and betrayal (Hilah) - built on words from Muhammad like "War is deceit", "War is betrayal" (and "everything is war) - and not least lawful disuse or breaking of words and even oaths - pay expiation afterwards if necessary - built on verses like 2/225, 3/54, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2. Can anyone really rely on Islam or a Muhammadan in serious cases, unless there are real proofs in addition?


This and the murder of likely millions of mulatto babies. Millions of black women in Africa were taken slaves and sold to harems in the Middle East and other Muhammadan areas. Sex slavery naturally gives babies - - - but like you perhaps know there never were or are many native mulattoes in Turkey, Syria, Iraq, etc., etc. There should have been a high number of millions. What happened? Mulatto babies in the family were too much of a shame, so the babies simply were murdered by their fathers or by their fathers' families. (See f.x. "African Echo", 21.12.2017.) A religion and a culture not stopping such deeds from the very beginning, both are somewhat "special".



This is written by an Islamosavant, Islamrealist, and Islam skeptic - and skeptical with a reason (or more correct, many reasons).








Chapter 2:




One debates in the medias, from pulpits, and among people what are the reasons for Muhammadan and Islamic non-integration and terrorism? But why do we not discuss the reason for the reasons - the Quran, the basis under Islam, and the cause for those problems?


The words of Muhammad originally after some years were jotted down on pieces of bone, palm leafs, skin, etc., and taken care of by one of Muhammad's at least 36 women over the years, one of his long time wives, Hafsa.


Based on these notes Qurans were composed, but - partly because the Arab alphabet was very incomplete (it mainly consisted of the consonants) - the contents varied quite a lot. 4 versions became dominant, but also these varied so much, that there were even armed strife about what was correct.


Because of this Caliph Uthman around 650 AD (Muhammad died in 632 AD) had an official edition made - but Muhammadan sources reckoned to be reliable, still today claim that he omitted some 100 verses he did not like, and also included a similar number not original ones. (NB: These claims are not proved, but are from persistent Muhammadan sources.) He then ordered all other Qurans to be burnt, but this was not done, and those other ones may have influenced later hand written copies (printed copies of the Quran arrived very late - not until in the 1920s). Caliph Uthman, like 10 out of the first 11 caliphs after Muhammad, was killed - in 656 AD. We thus know that his version of the Quran was from no later than 656 AD.


But the Arab alphabet still was very incomplete. It lacked vowels, writing signs like comma and full stop, and not least the points Arabic now uses to make some of the letters - the diacritical points. Because of this there once more emerged a virr-varr of Qurans, and the contents and details varied quite a lot.


Around the year 900 AD (the Arab alphabet by then finally was complete) a group led by the very learned ibn Mohair tried to find out which one of the very many versions was the right one. This they were unable to do. They ended up with "canonizing" 7 variants, but as each of them existed in 2 versions, that meant that 14 versions were "canonized". In addition there were 6 "good" versions and 4 "acceptable" ones. Islam thus has 24 accepted versions of the Quran, not one like most people - included most Muhammadans - believe. Of these 24 versions 6 are in daily use today at different places in the world, with the versions "Asim after Hafs" and "Nafi after Warsh" as the dominant ones. Uthman's version is lost. (Well, a short time ago - published now in 2018 - one found in an old archive in England, some scriptures which may be a couple of surahs copied from Uthman's edition, according to New Scientist.)


Thus here a most serious question emerges each time Islam or a Muhammadan claims that the Quran is the exact words of Allah: Which one of the 24 versions - if any - is the correct words of Allah?


# It actually is highly unlikely that any of the versions is the exact words of Muhammad. Even if we omit the persistent Muhammadan rumor that Caliph Uthman left out some 100 verses and added a similar number made up verses, there are all those many differences in the versions because of the very incomplete Arab alphabet used in Uthman's "original" version -  also that one was a version - that it is extremely unlikely that any one of the copyists transcribing Uthman's version into a more complete Arab alphabet, guessed correctly each and every one of the literally thousands of not fully clear - or directly unclear - points caused by the incomplete old alphabet. There will be some points guessed correct and some guessed wrongly in each and every one of those versions = it is highly unlikely there exists even one version of the Quran referring all Muhammad's words and tales correctly = it is highly unlikely there exists a "correct" Quran. This even more so as copyists may have made errors also later, when copying (making minor errors are quite common when copying by hand, and even minor errors make another lie of the never proved claim that "the Quran is the exact words of Allah").


Relevant here also are the many old copies of the Quran one found in Yemen in 1972: "They have small, but significant differences from today's Quran" = copying by hand during the centuries likely added errors later, too - by accidents, by wishful understanding of words or expressions, or by willful "corrections" to make the texts "better".


Even if one omits the info that Caliph Uthman falsified the Quran not a little, it thus is unlikely in the extreme also because of this fact from 1972 that any of the many versions of the Quran is the exact words of Muhammad, not to mention of Allah "down to the last comma", like many Muhammadans claim (especially as the comma did not exist in Arabic at the time of neither Muhammad, nor Uthman). If then Uthman in addition changed some 200 points, much is wrong in today's Qurans compared to Muhammad's words (and in addition there are the literally thousands of errors made by Muhammad - (or by Allah?)).


# But there are even more serious points. F.x. verses like 4/82, 10/37, 20/52, and 41/42 "confirm" - claim - that the book was sent down by Allah, and because of that perfect and free from errors. But the Quran is not perfect and free from errors, but full of wrong facts, other non-religious errors, contradictions, unclear points, etc. THESE MANY ERRORS and those verses PROVE 100% THAT IT IS NOT TRUE THAT THE QURAN IS THE WORDS OF A GOD (and there are more proofs). IF IT HAD BEEN FROM ALLAH, IT HAD BEEN PERFECT AND WITHOUT ERRORS, ETC.


The best overview over such errors you likely find in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran", (Amazon). That book also has the plus that the government's "The Office for Religion" in Malaysia unintentionally has confirmed that the list and comments are correct: They tried to have the book expelled from Google, but found no error in it serious enough to use for argument for having it expelled = the contents are correct. That book contains unbelievable 1750+ wrong facts, 350+ other non-religious errors, and 300+ contradictions from the Quran, this in spite of that the Quran has only 1/10 as much text as the Bible (320ooo words compared to 3,2 mill. words) = 2400+ errors just of these kinds = more than 1 error for every 3 verses in the Quran (and there are more).


No omniscient god makes 2400+ (and more) errors in his holy book = it provably is not true that the Quran is dictated by a god, in spite of what both the Quran itself and Islam without any proof claim = Islam is not from any god, but made up by somebody else, likely by Muhammad (and thus no women and Earth-like luxury life is awaiting  Muhammadan warriors and terrorists in a very Earth-like Paradise).


As revealing, but even more disturbing: The book "Muhammad Lying in the Quran", (Amazon), lists 100 points where Muhammad clearly or provably lies in the Quran. Fx. when he first tells that the sorcerers of Pharaoh Ramses II all suddenly became believing Muhammadans because of minor miracles made by Moses, but later he "explained" that the reason why Allah does not prove himself by making miracles, is that miracles all the same would make nobody believe. (This "explanation" also psychologically very obviously is wrong - miracles had made at least some believe.) No omnipotent and omniscient god needs to lie in his holy book, this even more so as he has to know that the lies sooner or later would be revealed, and he loose credence. (The same goes for the use of wrong facts, etc.) One more obvious and strong argument and proof  for that the Quran - and thus Islam - is not from a god.


And there is "The 13 proofs" - a small booklet on Amazon.


The Quran like mentioned also contains at least 650+ points where Muhammadan scholars (fx. Abdullah Yusuf Ali in his highly rated book with comments and explanations to the Quran, "The Meaning of the Holy Quran",) even today are unsure about what many points in the texts really mean, because the texts are unclear or have more than one possible meaning. This in spite of that the Quran several places states that the texts are so clear and easy to understand, that the very clearness is a proof for that the book is from a god - f.x. 4/82, 10/37, 20/52, 41/42.  (The very fact that the Quran hundreds of places is unclear, thus singelhanded proves that it is not true that the book is the words of a god.)


No omniscient real god is so helpless that he does not see to it that he expresses himself clearly and impossible to misunderstand in his holy book = a helpless language is even one more proof for that the Quran was not dictated by a god.


Also the Bible is "in the picture" as the Quran has much "Biblical" stuff. The problem is that this stuff often varies from what the Bible really tells. Muhammad, who knew the Bible badly and took his "Biblical" stuff from legends, etc. (science knows most of his sources), "explained" all that away with the never documented claim that the Bible was falsified, and claimed - also without a proof - that his versions were the correct ones.


But science knows some 13ooo scriptures or fragments from the Bible, included the Qumran scrolls (the same Biblical texts like the ones Jesus read from), plus 32ooo others with quotes from or references to Biblical texts, all older than 610 AD (the year Muhammad slowly started his proselyting, and before which year there was no reason for to falsify Biblical texts in order to oppose the Quran). The same is showed by the at least 5ooo that old "witnesses" from archeology, architecture, art, etc. Not one single proved falsification is found - many claims, but not one single proved case. (Guess if Islam had warned against it, if even one proved falsification had been found!! There is no such scream from Islam. This is a very strong proof for that the never proved claim is not true.) This tells something about the Bible, but more essential here is that it shows that where the Quran's "Biblical" tales differ from the Bible, it is the Quran which is wrong. There exists lists with more than 1500 such errors. If you add the 2400 errors + the 100 lies/errors above, this means there are unbelievable 4ooo+ errors in a rather small book which Muhammadans claim is the exact words of an omniscient god! In addition there are at least 650+ unclear points, something no omniscient god would use, plus possible religious errors. The Quran is slowly approaching 1 error for each of its 6236 verses. Are you able to believe that an omniscient god is behind such a helpless and error-infected work?


Add the 1500+ points with slander against non-Muhammadans and the 950+ points with boasting of the Muhammadans. If you do not think an omniscient god needs slander or boasting, there only of these kinds of questionable points are 4ooo + 650 + 1500 + 950 = 7100+ questionable points in the Quran = more than 1 for each verse.


Are you able to believe that this is the work of a god? -  an even claimed omniscient god?


In addition to the at least 50ooo traces older than 610 AD from Jews and Christians, there exist at least as many from other religions on Earth, BUT NOT ONE SINGLE THAT OLD TRACE FROM A GOD LIKE THE MUHAMMADAN ALLAH, A RELIGION OF WAR AND ACCEPTED DISHONESTY LIKE ISLAM, OR A BOOK LIKE THE QURAN. This proves that also this central claim in Islam, that Islam is the original religion on Earth, with prophets like Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, also is not true - 100ooo : 0 = a proof of mathematical strength. (Mathematical proofs are absolute.)  When it comes to Jesus, written history, art, etc. in addition prove that the religion in what now is Israel, at his time was the Jewish one, and that no religion like the war and dishonesty religion Islam existed until some 580 years later. (If history is correct, Jesus died in 33 AD, and Muhammad started proselyting in earnest in 613 AD.)


Another relevant point concerning Islam, is words like al-Taqiya (lawful lies), Kitman (lawful half-truths), Hilah (lawful pretending or circumventing), all based on verses like 3/54, 4/182, 8/30, 27/50, etc. - when Allah can make "smart" plans, etc., so can his followers. There further are are lawful cheating and betrayal - like Muhammad's treatment of the peace delegation from Khaybar, an act based on a trumped up "reason" and in stark contradiction to all rules for promised safety and safe return - promises they had been given. But lawful dishonesty is lawful in Islam. And not least: There is the lawful disuse of words and even oaths (f.x. 2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2) - pay expiation afterwards if the disuse and the lies were too serious.


It is a bit strange that a man with such points of view on central moral points like dishonesty, deceit, betrayal, etc., and even worse when one adds his point of view concerning humans in strife and power strife, and clearly with lust for respect, power, plus riches to by more power - and women - in Islam is reckoned to be nearly a saint, and a man who never would ever dream about deceiving also his followers a little - or much - (but if it was not for this not logical point of view, the bottom would once more fall from under the "religion").


But even today it is not uncommon that the leaders of sects by their followers are reckoned to be more or less infallible - Muhammad is not the only one.


As for words like strife, war, etc., I may mention that the Quran and its claimed "Religion of Peace" contains 300+ points glorifying the use of violence against and suppression or killing of all "infidels", and another 300+ points inciting to, or ordering the same - though not fully 600 together, because of some overlap (listed in f.x. "Verses of War in the Quran", Amazon).


Even worse: There like mentioned above are lists containing more than 1500 points in the Quran where non-Muhammadans are mentioned, mostly in negative words, and described as bad humans and "Untermench" who deserve whatever bad fates they meet, and 950+ corresponding points about Muhammadans - haughty words about top quality, and with the right and the duty (as Muhammad should have 20% of everything stolen/robbed and slaves taken) to rob, suppress, enslave, and kill all "infidels". Such "information" gives haughtiness and the psychological basis for the dehumanizing and inhuman treatment of the "enemies". And the possibility to steal oneself rich and to take slaves (f.x. 8/1, 8/41, 8/69, 48/15), plus lawful rape (f.x. 8/69, 23/6, 33/50, 70/30) likely also helped on the wish to take part in raids and wars - then and now.


Once before when terrorism and murder was a main argument for Islam - under the Assassins - it took 180 years and the mighty and unforgiving Mongolian armies to put an end to the terrorism. Are we at the start of a new such period now? It in case will be far less bloody to massively publish the facts about what the Quran and Islam really are - a made up "religion" of dishonesty and war, built on a book which provably is not from any god, as too much in that book is wrong and literally full of errors no god would make - than to fight it physically.


You meet arguments like "there are errors in all religious main books". Yes, but the difference is that all the other such books are  written by humans, and humans may make errors. The Quran and Islam both claim that the Quran is dictated by an omniscient god, is the exact words of that god, and so totally free from errors, and so perfect, that the very perfection proves that the texts really are the exact words from a god (4/82, 10/37, 20/52, etc.). No omniscient god makes lots of errors in his holy book. That is why errors - and lots of errors - are so much more serious in the Quran: They prove that it is a lie that the book is from a god. One more lie in the Quran - and a most serious one.


You also meet the argument that also the Christians and others are or have been warlike. But a serious difference here is that when f.x. Christians fight or make war, it is in spite of the Bible, and especially of NT, and in spite of the words of Jesus - they are sinning. In Islam such behavior is in accordance with and often because of the Quran's words, incitements, and moral codes - they are following what they believe are the words of a god, when they go to war "to serve Allah".


As this - both that the majority of the Muhammadans are ok, and that it is impossible to know about the descendants of even the best Muhammadans - is so essential for the future years and generations, we repeat: Remember that the absolute majority of Muhammadans are just as human as others. A big scientific research published in 2016 AD, showed that only some 2.5% of the Muhammadans have sympathy for the use of violence, and that in times of peace it is only these - but all of these - who are in the danger zone for becoming warriors or terrorists. Not are terrorists, but are in the danger zone for becoming such.But 2.5% of 1.6 billion after all are 40 million - and how to know who is dangerous and who not? - now and in later generations? Good quality Muhammadans may get children, grandchildren, etc., etc. who become terrorists.  Angry Muhammadans must understand that this is our dilemma, and that we do not like to be killed in order to promote a "religion" of dishonesty, racism,  and blood, which on top of all provably is not from a god.


Well, if we are to put an end to the problems, it is not enough to analyze and then address "the reasons". One has to start with  - and address - the reason for the reasons, the Quran.


Racism, violence, terrorism, war, etc. are so integrated in the Quran, and thus in Islam, that it will never come to a final end as long as someones believe the Quran is the words of a god. There may be ups and downs, but never a final end to it.


To debate integration, what we can do, if we do something wrong, etc., etc., is to debate and try to solve branches of the problem. But the hatred, violence, and terror, etc. will never come to a permanent end, until one does something with the root of Islam - the Quran.






(A little about myself and Islam.


I know some more than most western people about Islam, partly because I had traveled some in Muhammadan countries. But then there started to come more Muhammadans into my country, and one does not understand a people and a culture fully, unless one knows the main points of their religion. When I started to look into Islam, it was because even if I knew some about that "religion", I understood I did not know enough, and simply sought knowledge to better understand their cultures, ways of thinking, and their background.


I bought what was said was the best of the 3 top translations of the Quran to English: Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation, and also his book with comments to the Quran: "The Meaning of the Holy Quran", plus Muhammad Asad's "The Message of the Quran" and one or two books more. 


I read - and was frightened. Some because of all the bloody aspects with the Quran, it's orders about suppressing or killing all "infidels", etc., but honestly most because of all the wrong facts, other non-religious errors, contradictions, unclear points, some clear lies, etc.: No book of such a quality ever came from a god, in spite of what Islam and the Quran itself claim many places. A book of violence and blood, and full of errors, and a book which lied about its own creation, as the basis for a "religion"! Also the Quran's point of view on the use of dishonesty as a "work tool" I reacted to.


I now through some years have studied the Quran in my spare time, and my point of view concerning it is if possible strengthened: A war, strongly racist,  terror, and suppression - and accepting dishonesty as a work tool - religion  based on a provably made up book (all the wrong facts, other errors, etc. prove it is not from any god, as no god makes hundreds and more clear errors, plus some lies in his holy book - only one alternative remains: The Quran is made up by somebody else (likely by Muhammad - a man who had MUCH to gain in respect and power from making people believe in his tales)).


There also are other proofs for the same.


In a time of terrorism like today, these are facts which ought to be brought into light, and debated and informed about. If the proofs for that it is not true that the Quran is from a god, becomes well enough known, it may make one or some terrorist(s) think twice before they mutilate or kill because of superstition.)




Chapter 3:   

THE 13 PROOFS (for that the Quran is not from any god).




(Please spread this text or at least these facts as far and wide as possible, included on Facebook,Twitter, etc. The more you spread it, the more people will read it. Muslim terrorism and partly immoral moral codes and culture will not come to a final end, until the world is thoroughly aware of that the never proved claim that the Quran is the words of a god, is not true = the Quran is made up by someone else (likely by Muhammad) = Islam is a made up "religion".  Also read the 2 very last paragraphs.)








The Quran and Islam both claim - without any proof - that the Quran is an exact copy of "the Mother of the Book" (13/39, 43/4) in Heaven, the original of the Quran, highly  respected by Allah and his angels (43/4), and sent down to all claimed Muhammadan (the correct name as the Quran provably is not from a god) prophets through the times (10/47, 16/36, 35/24), included Muhammad. Muhammad claimed he received it by inspiration (42/5, 53/10) or via the angel Gabriel. It is claimed it was and is the god`s perfect, unchangeable, and infallible words, then, now, and forever (10/64) - so perfect that the very perfection is a proof for that the texts are the exact words of the god (fx. verses 4/82, 10/37, 20/52, 41/42), and contains the best explanations, as nobody can explain better and more correct than a god (25/33, 75/19, and many more). But:


 1. The Quran contains unbelievable 1750+ wrong facts (compared to present knowledge and science) and 350+ other non-religious errors (fx. "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran").  Religious errors are not included here. No omniscient god makes LOTS of errors in his "holy" book.  A very strong and easy to check on proof - no omniscient god delivers such a quality "holy" book.


 2. Many of the errors are so grave, that each of them or a few together make additional proofs for that it is not true that the texts are from a god (there thus in reality are far more than 13 proofs for that it is not true that the Quran is the words of a god). Fx.: 7 Heavens (2/29, 17/44, 23/17 and many more) rests on the (flat) Earth by means of invisible pillars (fx. 13/2, 31/10). The stars are fastened to the lowermost heaven (37/6, 41/12, 67/5) - below the Moon (71/16 - the Moon is between the heavens = the stars are below the moon. Earth would be VERY hot in case.) - and used for shooting stars to chase away jinns and bad spirits wanting to spy on the Heavens (37/10, 67/5). Below the Heavens there are 7 (flat) Earths (65/12 - all named in Hadiths), with Hell at the bottom. The rivers Nile and Euphrates  starts in the heavens according to Hadits. No god has to borrow old, wrong Greek and Persian astronomy  and more, corresponding to what one wrongly believed was true knowledge at the time of Muhammad, in a small part of the Earth.


 3. The Quran contains 300+ internal contradictions (and more external ones) ("1000+ Mistakes in the Quran"). No omniscient god has such a helpless overview over what he has said and done, that he contradicts himself, not to mention hundreds of times. (Till here: 2400+ errors already.)


 4. The Quran has 650+ points where the texts, according to Muhammadan scholars, are so unclear, that Islam still does not know for sure what really is meant. No omniscient god is so dull that he is unable to express himself crystal clear, and especially so in his (claimed) holy book. (Till here: 3050+ errors, etc. - for an omniscient god also unclear instructions and information are errors.)


 5. The Quran contains much "Biblical" stuff, but it "borrowed" this from legends, made up apocryphals, local folklore, etc., and not from the Bible - Muhammad knew the Bible little (relevant science knows the real sources). Because of this , the "Biblical" points in the Quran diverges from what the Bible really says at more than 1500 points. Muhammad "explained" all such errors and more with the never proved claim that the reason for the divergences was that the Bible was falsified, and that his texts were correct. But science knows 13ooo scriptures and fragments from the Bible, plus 32ooo others with quotes from or references to  the Bible, all of them older then 610 AD (when Muhammad started proselyting). In addition there are at least 5ooo as old traces from archeology, buildings, art, etc. ("1000+ Comments on the Quran", Amazon). THESE TEXTS ALL ARE THE SAME ONES WE HAVE IN THE BIBLE TODAY (AND AT THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD, AS THE BIBLE GOT ITS PRESENT FORM DURING THE COUNCIL OF LAODICEA IN 363 AD). "Ergo" the old scriptures are not falsified. (A strong proof for this: If even one single proved falsification had ever been found, Islam had SCREAMED about it. No such scream is heard from their scholars - claims, yes, but nothing more, and mainly in texts meant for lay people or non-Muhammadans.) This means that when the Quran uses wrong quotes or references from the Bible, it is the Quran which is in error. No omniscient god knows the Bible so badly, that he uses wrong quotes, etc. 1500+ times in his(?) after all small "holy" book.


For OT there also is the "Jesus Proof":  Jesus read from the OT in synagogues and in the Temple. If a prophet of a quality like both the Bible and the Quran tells Jesus was of - verse 19/19 in the Quran f.x. tells that Jesus was holy (something it is very clear on that Muhammad was not) - he had reacted strongly if he had been given falsified texts to read. Neither the Bible nor the Quran mentions such reactions from him (except towards some younger scriptures added by Jewish scholars). This even more so as according to the Quran and Islam he was given a copy of the holy book in Heaven, so that he HAD to see it f there were falsifications.  = Falsifications of OT cannot have been made until after Jesus died in 33 AD. But in also all the many scriptures and fragments older than 33 AD we have - f.x. the Qumran scrolls - the texts are identical to in the present Bible = no falsification has been done. See Proof 6.

 (Errors till here: 4550+).


6. The Qumran scrolls contains large parts of OT. (Parts of each "book" in the OT, except "The Book of Esther".) Those scrolls are from 150-50 BC, and the Biblical parts thus have the same texts Jesus read from in the synagogues and the Temple. If any texts had been falsified, a prophet of that quality, also according to the Quran (he like mentioned is no. 3 in esteem in Islam after Muhammad and Abraham, and like said holy according to 19/19), had strongly warned about it. He never did, neither in the Bible, nor in the Quran. If there had been falsifications in the Bible, it thus had to have been done after Jesus died in 33 AD. But a number of the traces from OT mentioned in point 5, are older than 33 AD =  accepted by Jesus and thus no falsifications of those old texts. And for the period 33 - 610 AD there are so many sources, that it is nonsense to claim that the claimed falsifications were done during that time.  Any omniscient god had known all this. Besides: Neither Muhammad nor Islam has ever explained how it was possible first to find each and every one of tens of thousands of scriptures from the Bible, business letters and personal letters, etc. quoting the Bible, all religious buildings, art, etc. spread over 3 continents, and then identically falsify everything and without making contradictions, etc. - or how to get permission from EVERY owner to falsify their cherished holy scriptures, art, etc. - and doing such a clever job that not even modern science is able to see anything? And how to falsify art or words carved in wood or stone in a church or on a statue or another monument, etc.? Not to mention how to falsify good Muhammadan statues or paintings, etc. (such art hardly is permitted in Islam, but some existed in early Muhammadan times), to show Christian motifs and symbols instead? Things are wrong also here.


7. Then there are  the abrogations (f.x. 2/106, 16/101). An abrogation  means that Allah(?) had to change what he earlier had said or indicated, or make it more  complete. Normally in such cases the  youngest text is the valid one (a main reason why it is essential to  know the age of the texts in the Quran), but the oldest, and now invalid one, is not removed from the book. Muhammadan scholars disagree some about how many abrogations there are in the Quran, but perhaps some 500. Only 9/5 - "the verse of the sword" - abrogates 124 milder points according to Muhammadan scholars. The reason for that high number may be that Islam was reasonably peaceful until Muhammad fled from Mecca to Medina in 622 AD,  but shortly after he started as a  highway man and robber baron, and the religion fast was changed to one of blood, terror, and dishonesty, and then many older points in the religion and the Quran had to be adjusted. Muhammadans NEVER tell about or explain this fundamental change around 622/623 AD. But it is symptomatic that very many of the abrogations are connected to this transformation of the religion, and  that many came just in the years 622-624 AD. Was it Allah who who suddenly found he originally had created a too peaceful and honest religion from Adam and up? Or Muhammad who needed dishonesty and warriors? No matter: No omniscient god is unable to always make things right at his first try, and instead have to abrogate himself - hundreds of times.(Errors, etc. till here: 5050+). NB: All the central points concerning abrogations, are in surahs - chapters - from 622 AD or later.


8.  The Quran tells that Jesus was a strong believer in Allah and Islam (4/171-172, 5/72, and many more) But there are plenty of written and other sources from around the time of Jesus (fx. Josephus Flavius, Tacitus), which prove that the religion of the Jews, and thus of Jesus, also at that time was the Mosaic - Jewish - one. Well, Jesus likely was the first Christian. Any god had known this.


 9. The Quran claims to be the original religion on Earth from Adam and Abraham om and up, and all over the Earth - absolutely all people and cultures on Earth and through all times up to Mohammad had prophets preaching Allah, it claims (.. 10/47, 16/36, 35/24, 57/25) - at least 124ooo prophets through the times, according to Hadiths. But the religion was falsified into the Jewish, Christian, and the many heathen religions (how was that possible if it is true that Allah decides and predestines everything people do, and predestines it according to a divine Plan nothing and nobody can change (fx. 10/64)?) But science like mentioned knows more than 50ooo traces from the Jewish and Christian religions, and at least as many from other religions all over the world, all older than 610 AD, BUT NOT ONE SINGLE TRACE FROM A GOD LIKE THE MUHAMMADAN ALLAH, A RELIGION LIKE ISLAM, OR A BOOK SIMILAR TO THE QURAN, OLDER THAN 610 AD = also this very central claim, in the Quran is untrue. 100ooo : 0 is a proof of mathematical strength. Also this any omniscient god had known. It simply is not true that the Quran or Islam is older than 610 AD - or from a god.


10. Woven into point 9 is also history. Written history started around 3300-3200 BC. There is not one single word clearly relevant to Islam older than 610 AD anywhere in the world. Thus also written history proves that it is not true that Islam is the original religion on Earth, or that Islam is older than 610 AD. Like said above: 100ooo : 0 is a strong proof.


11. Several points in the Quran are physically impossible. F.x. predestination (f.x. 3/145, 3/154, 7/34, 10/64, 23/43) - a very central

point in the Quran - is impossible if man (or animals) has free will, like the Quran claims. With even a small touch of free will, man - or animals - always may change his mind once more. Then the future is changed, and Allah's predestination is gone. In the non-physical parts of existence, there are things impossible even for an omniscient and omnipotent god. Any omniscient god had known this. (Also prayer runs into problems here: If Allah has predestined everything, and predestined it according to a divine Plan "nobody and nothing can change", also prayers can change nothing. Similar goes for forgiving.)


12. The book "Muhammad Lying in the Quran",  Amazon, lists 100 points in the Quran where Muhammad obviously or provably lies. (Fx. the sorcerers of Ramses II suddenly became believing Muhammadans (2ooo years before Muhammad), because of small miracles made by Moses (20/69, 26/46). Later Muhammad "explained" that the reason why Allah did not prove himself by making a miracle, was that miracles would make nobody believe anyhow (f.x. 17/59). This claim also psychologically is very wrong - real miracles would make at least some believe.) No omniscient and omnipotent god needs to lie in his "holy" book. This even more so as he had to know the lies would be discovered sooner or later, and he loose trust from the people. (As also lies are wrong facts: Till here 5150+ errors, etc. But the lists are not complete, and thus the real number is higher. If we also add the points in the Quran where the book slanders non-Muhammadans - slander normally are things made up or exaggerated = wrong claims or statements - there easily on average may be 1 error or something in each and every one of the 6236 verses in the Quran. The same if there are religious errors. (There is a list listing 1500+ points in the Quran where non-Muhammadans are mentioned, mostly defaming/slandering or dehumanizing them, but that list is not complete. The correct number likely is between 1500 and 2ooo. In addition there is a list of 950+ points telling how good quality the Muhammadans are. As for religious errors in a provably made up "holy" book, it is anybody's guess how many such errors there are.)


It is slander and blasphemy to blame a god for holding in high esteem or for the delivery of a book of this quality. The book fx. is approaching unbelievable one error a verse - likely more if you add religious errors (as the Quran provably is not from a god, there will be religious errors, too).


One more proof for that the claim is not true.


13. Like mentioned in point 11, predestination is very central in the Quran (fx. 23/43, etc.). But it is very easy to prove it is not true. It f.x. is very easy to prove by means of statistics - if a proof is necessary - that if you are plowing your field instead of taking part in a battle of war, the chances for that you are alive the next day, greatly improve. (And even if you all the same keel over dead in your field, the very fact that you died another place, will upset Allah's divine Plan for the future. The laws of chaos are very strict there.)


Further: It is impossible to combine full predestination like the Quran claims, with even a little free will for man.


Also this any god had known = one more proof for that the Quran is not the words of a god.



The only possible conclusion from these proofs: It is not true that the Quran is the exact words of a god. (Thus there hardly will be any royal, Earth-like  luxury life, servants, and willing sex slaves - a luxury brothel - waiting for dead warriors or terrorists "at the other side".) Islam also is unable to tell which one of the 24 versions of the Quran accepted by Islam (6 versions are in daily use today), in case is the one - if any - which has the correct words of Allah. (The oldest known Quran today, was written around 705 - 715 AD and found in Yemen in 1972. Quite much is different there from f.x. the most used version of today, Asim after Hafs.)


As no god delivers a book of such a quality and that full of errors, etc. like the Quran, there only are 3 possible makers:

1. Dark forces - f.x. dressed up like the (arch)angel Gabriel (it would be impossible for Muhammad to see the difference).

2. A sick brain. Medical science suspects that Muhammad had TLE - a brain illness which can give just the kind of religious "experiences" and "inspirations" Muhammad is said to have had.

3. A cold brain.


Or a combination of  these. (Personally we do not believe in point 1. Not even a devil hunting for victims, would deliver a quality like in the Quran - lousy composition, lots of repetitions, thousands of errors, many lies, unclear texts, several cases of invalid logic, etc. He had to know that the errors, etc. would be discovered sooner or later, and the book lose credence - - - - if he was not fully aware of that believers believe what they prefer to believe and what their parents and surroundings claim ("taqlid" in Arabic), and damn the facts which prove something different. Related to what science names "the backfire effect" - where facts trying to correct wrong worldviews or self-concept, instead make the person embrace his wrong belief even more - and to what is named "cognitive dissonance" where 2 conflicting ideas in the brain at the same time, prompts people to spin-doctor the facts to get at the answer one wishes, instead of the correct answer.


And there is "thinking, mode 1" - to look only for claims that may strengthen what you want to believe, instead of "thinking, mode 2: Looking around to try to find out what is the truth.


The proved fact that it is not true that the Quran is the words of a god = it is a made up book, means that Islam is a made up (war) religion, a heathen/pagan "religion" like f.x. the religion of the vikings - another religion of war, but less dishonest than Islam. Allah = Odin (the wise god)? Muhammad = Thor (the warrior)? (Even if Mohammad formally is not divine or holy, he is treated like that in Islam - infallible, always right, high above normal humans, etc.)


The easiest proof to see and to document, may be all the wrong facts and other errors in the Quran.



Central books:

"1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" (This book was tried eradicated from the net by "The Office for Religion" in Malaysia, but they found no errors in it serious enough to use as argument for eradication = the lists and comments in the book are correct".

"1000+ Comments on the Quran"

"Muhammad Lying in the Quran"

"The 13 Proofs" for that the Quran is not from a God. (A booklet - with permission included in this book.)

 "The Reason for the Reasons behind Muslim Terrorism". (A booklet - with permission included in this book.)


All on Amazon, some also on the net, f.x.






Chapter 4:







If it had not been the claimed "holy" book of a big and powerful "religion", the Quran had been prohibited long time ago in all civilized and semi civilized countries, because:


 1. It provably is a book inciting to apartheid, hate, violence, and blood.

Muhammad's political platform, simply - later taken over by other leaders. If

it was a product of TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy), it is possible Muhammad

believed his own words in the beginning.


 2.  300+ points glorifying the use of violence and suppression. F.x. 9/20:

"Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with might (= terrorism,

raids or war*) and mind, in Allah's cause, with their goods (weapons, money*)

and persons, have the highest rank in the sight of Allah". (There is said

to be 533 verses in the Quran favoring violence, suppression, etc. But as some

verses has more than one such point, and as there also may be some overlap,

fx. "Verses of War in the Quran" lists 300+ points glorifying, plus

300+ points inciting to such behavior.)


 3.  300+ points inciting to or ordering the use of violence and suppression.

F.x. 9/5: "- - - fight and slay the Pagans wherever you

find them, and size them and slay them, beleaguer them, and lay in wait for

them in every stratagem (of war)".  (Actually this sentence is a bit

ironic, because as the Quran is a made up book, and Islam thus a made up

religion, all Muhammadans are Pagans or at least heathens themselves.) Fx.

9/29: "Fight those who believe not in Allah - - - until they pay jizya

(extra tax*) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued".


 4. "- - - every stratagem of war" (9/5) includes the use of

dishonesty and not least of terrorism. ("I was made victorious through

terrorism", Muhammad said - Hadith, al-Bukhari, 4/52/220 - and everything

which was right for him, was and is and for ever will be right - and the right

thing to do - for all Muhammadans.)


 5. Strongly raceistic with Muhammadans on top, Jews and Christians much

lower, and everybody else at the bottom.


 6. Strongly advocating social segregation - apartheid - with the Muhammadans

on top, Jews and Christians as after a fashion acceptable, but the rest hardly

so. 9/16: "- - - take none for friends and protectors except Allah,

Muhammad, and the (community of) Believers - - -".


 7. At least 1500 points more or less slandering and dehumanizing all

"infidels". F.x. 9/28: "- - - the Pagans are unclean - -

-". Basis for racism (remember that discrimination based on religion is

defined as a kind of racism), discrimination, apartheid, hate, and worse.


 8. At least 950 points telling that Muhammadans are good, or better or much

better than non-Muhammadans. Basis for racism, discrimination, apartheid,

hare, and worse.




How should we look at such a book?


And last, but definitely not least: How should the fact that it is strongly

proved that the Quran is a made up book, and Islam thus a made up, pagan

religion - a superstition - influence our view and reactions towards the Quran

and Islam, its propaganda, deeds, etc., and not least to its terrorism?


(Yes, we know very well that most or perhaps all religions are made up ones,

but Islam is a special case: A religion of dishonesty, apartheid, hate,

suppression, terrorism, blood, and war - and lawful rape. Besides: For the

Quran it is a proved fact that it is a made up book. For other

"holy" books it is from a belief to obvious that they are made up,

but often not strongly proved, like with the Quran.)





There are:


1. Lawful stealing/looting. This in principle is connected to raids and wars

and after raids and wars. But the entire Earth, except the Muhammadan areas,

is defined by Islam as "the land of war", and also even today's

militant leaders incite Muhammadan activists to steal from or cheat "the

infidels" to finance activity and terror. 4/94: "- - - with Allah is

profits and spoils abundant" = steal yourself rich when fighting for

Islam. 8/41: "- - - out of all the booty ye may acquire (steal*) (in

war), a fifth is assigned to Allah (Muhammad*)". No comment should be

necessary.  8/69: "But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and

good". What they took in war was food, clothes, money, valuables, and

slaves + if Islam conquered the area, sometimes the farms, businesses, houses,

etc. of the victims - f.x. 33/27: "And Allah made you heirs to their

lands, their houses, and their goods, - - -". 48/15: "- - - when ye

(are free to) march and take booty - - -".


2. Lawful slave taking (= to steal the victims' work capacity, humanity, and

future - and for females also stealing their sexual and child bearing



3. Lawful lie (al Taqiyya).

4. Lawful half-truths (Kitman).

5. Lawful pretending or circumventing (Hilah).

Numbers 3, 4, and 5 are based on verses like 3/54, 8/30, 13/42, 27/50,

86/15-16. When it is ok for Allah to "plot and plan", it of course

is ok for Muhammadans, too. These 3 are permitted to be used in some ten wide

cases, like cheating women or to secure your money, and it should be used

"if necessary" to defend or promote Islam. (One may speculate on how

many have been cheated into Islam, or cheated to stay on in the



6. Lawful cheating.

7. Lawful deceit.

8. Lawful betrayal.

These 3 are based on Muhammad's example and words, mainly in Hadith, like:

"War is deceit", "War is betrayal" - like when Muhammad

murdered the peace delegation from Khaybar by means of cheating or deceit. 


9. Lawful disuse or breaking of words or even oaths. This is based on verses

like 2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2. In principle you should honor your oaths, at

least the confirmed ones. But break them if that will give a better result -

pay expiation afterwards if necessary.


None of the other big religions have similar rules, and definitely not as many

and as wide.


Our minimum reaction should be to be careful believing Muhammadans, Muhammadan

leaders, and Muhammadan nations in serious cases, unless there are real proofs

in addition to their words.








Normally we have free speech in the West. But it is well known and proved that

some of these disuse their free speech, their permission to stay in a country,

or their new nationality, to teach hate, dishonesty, suppression, violence,

and war. That is not lawful or good morally.





Comments similar to for point C.







Several Muhammadans use signs for that they are supporting and forwarding this

"religion": Big beards, hijab, burka, and others. How shall we react

to such signs? Shall we accept them? A special point here is that there are no

requests for the mentioned signs in the Quran - they have become

political/religious symbols later, and are not parts of the Muhammad's

teaching. The only thing the Quran says here, is that women shall cover their

hair. F.x. the burka originally was a snobbish upper class idea from Persia -

the rich and "fine" ones wanted to demonstrate the distance between

them and the "plebeis" to use that word - the lower classes. An idea

which was aped in some towns in Arabia, included in Mecca - and by some

Muhammadans later on. Today it is a clear religious/political sign: "We

support and promote Islam and its moral and political code". (The closest

thing we in the West have to a burka, is what some places is named a Finland

hood - a hood covering the entire head, but with openings for the eyes. At

least some places it is prohibited to wear such one in public places (but

permitted when hunting, working outside in real cold, etc.) This in spite of

that this hood sends no political or other signal of support to dishonesty,

apartheid, suppression, slave taking, terrorism, etc., like f.x. the burka

does. Should such things be restricted/prohibited?


There also is another explanation for the niqab: It was ok to rape the many

captive women in Islam. But one day one of Muhammad's men, Omar saw that a man

followed one of Muhammad's wives, Sauda, likely with bad intentions, and

without knowing she was one of the wives of Muhammad. Omar intervened of

course, but afterwards complained to Muhammad, and propose outfit covering the

face to reduce the temptation for men, and signaling prohibition. This

Muhammad agreed to, and according to the Quran also introduced for all

Muhammadan women. This may be the specific reason for face covering of women

in Islam.


What are facts:

1. The Greek geographer Strabor in the 1. century AD told that some women in

Persia used clothes which covered the face.

2. The (Christian) writer Tertullian in the 3. century told similar about some

women in Arabia.

3. It therefore is possible that the idea originally came from Persia, like

some sources tells, but that it was introduced into Islam   by an advice or

order from Muhammad.

4. But no matter if the idea of covering the face of women and

"exclude" them from the world originally came from the pagan Persia,

or from the pre-Islamic pagan Arabia, there is an irony in that a tradition

originally from a pagan culture, has become one of the symbols for Islam, and

a symbol for support of Islam.


Fx. burka and niqab also makes social contact, etc. much more difficult.


"Mein Kampf" was harsh. The Quran is harsh - its political program

and morality on points is not too far from "Mein Kampf" (Islam

sometimes is compared to just Nazism - f.x. by the famous psychologist C. G.

Young). The "religion" Nazism killed some 20-30 million (the rest of

the ones killed during WW2 mainly was because of the conflict with Japan). The

religion "Islam" has till now killed 270 millions + some tens of

millions during slave raids, transport, and business, (the number 190 million

has been mentioned), and + the many millions of mulatto babies killed by their

fathers. (To the Americas there through some 300 years were imported some

3.5-4 million female black slaves, mainly for work. They now have some 180

mill. descendants. Islam imported some 25 million black female slaves, and

mainly for sexual use in the harems, through some 1300 years. They now have

practically no descendants. It simply was too much of a shame to have mulatto

children in the family, so the babies were murdered by their fathers or his

family. (F.x. "African Echo", 21.12.17). The number 50 million has

been mentioned. This is a little known story, but everybody who knows a little

about the Middle East and neighboring Muhammadan areas, know there are

practically no native mulattoes. There should have been perhaps a billion.)

And Islam continues to kill. Symbols promoting Nazism are more or less

prohibited, and as nearly forbidden socially. Should symbols promoting the

proved made up and very apartheid, and bloody racism religion Islam, be

accepted or forbidden?





When it comes to terrorists, there is no disagreement on how to react -

especially against the ones killing children and other innocent people on

purpose - except that parts of Islam name them heroes and price them highly.

The problem is the warriors:


1. They have fought for a political idea which at points is harsher than even



2. They in many cases have fought in ways far beyond the international

laws/agreement for "lawful" warfare.


3. Perhaps worst: They for one thing are fanatics - if not they had not gone

to Syria or wherever to fight. They have much training using weapons and

explosives. How many will become terrorists at home or other places in the



How to react to such persons?





Generally speaking there are two groups of immigrants: The ones coming to make

money, and the ones fleeing from danger. At least at the time when this is

written (2018 AD), there are so many fleeing from real danger, that may be we

should drop the ones seeking money, to be able to help more of the ones who

really need help?


But problems remain:


1. Like told before, according to international science, 2.5% of all

Muhammadans have sympathy for the use of violence as a working tool, and all

of these - still according to science - may become dangerous. But it is

impossible for us to know who is who. And 2.5% of 1.6 billion after all are 40

million. + How many dangerous descendants will they have?


2. Even the best of Muhammadans may get children, or grandchildren, etc. who

will obey the Quran and become dangerous - wanting to kill our grandchildren

or later ones, to promote Islam. It is impossible for us to know who will get

such descendants, and the price for letting in wrong persons may be tall.


3. A few of the ones arriving from war zones, seems to be trained terrorists

pretending to be refugees, but planning terror. Who are who? Impossible to



I do not like to be killed. My children or grandchildren or great

grandchildren hardly will like to be killed or suppressed - or raped

(Muhammadans in the West rape a lot more often than locals - perhaps because

the Quran's wide permissions for it, perhaps because they reckon

non-Muhammadans to be "Untermench" (Nazi German for

"sub-humans"), perhaps because they so often claim that all Western

women are prostitutes, and make themselves believe so, or perhaps for other



Because of all this, it may be wise - and cheaper, so that one can help more -

to hep them in a Muhammadan country?






"Is then one who is brought up between trinkets, and unable to give a

clear account in a dispute (to be associated with Allah)?" (43/18).  Add

that in most situations a woman has half the value of a man, that a man has

the right to dominate his woman/women, because he feed them, etc. (because

women mostly could not work outside the home), and that rape in

several cases was/is ok, plus women for sex slavery in Heaven is a central

part of a man's reward in the next life, if he has been a good Muhammadan, add

all this and you have the broad picture of women's position in Islam.


Is this acceptable in modern societies?


Ps. In large parts of the Muhammadan area women had a better standing before

Islam was introduced there.





The Sharia laws partly are very inhuman and very unjust. How to react to the

claims that Muhammadans want these laws to take over in your country, or at

least that Muhammadans shall be judged by them (a judicial system for

Muhammadans in your country, parallel to your ordinary system)? If Islam

becomes strong enough in your country, one of these two alternatives may be

the result.





Islam and the Quran have several central point which provably are wrong, but

all the same are essential in their religion, propaganda, preaching, and

proselyting. F.x. "Islam is the original religion all over the world,

from Adam on and till now", "The Bible is falsified",

"Jesus was a believing Muslim prophet". How shall we react to

priests, other leaders, politicians, newspapers and other media, etc. who fail

us and themselves by confirming such provably wrong facts and disinformation

by not thoroughly informing about the proofs for that the claims are wrong?

(See separate chapter.)





1. Immigrants coming to "the West" - even as far "West" as

Australia and New Zealand, not to mention America and Europe - for money, we

have no obligations to help. This also goes for our authorities. Such

immigrants should be stopped at the border, so that we can help more of the

ones who really are real refugees and do need help. And if they all the same

get in, they should be left to fend for themselves.


2. Then there are the real refugees. It is a human obligation to help people

who are in real danger. But should we help them in their neighboring

countries, or in our own countries? There are several reasons for this

question. F.x.:

A. When their trouble is over and they safely can go home, very few will leave

the rich West to do so.

B. Immigrants - and especially so Muhammadan - are strongly over-represented

as doers of serious crime, included rape.

C. Because of the Quran's very special moral code and its demands for

suppression or killing of all non-Muhammadans, there forever will emerge

terrorists, and if (when?) the Muhammadans are many enough at places, unrest

and even pogroms may (will?) happen.

D. And there is the question about jobs. Already there at times and places are

competition about the kind of jobs which demand little knowledge. What many do

not think over is that we are at the start of an IT revolution, and that most

of these jobs will be taken over by "thinking" machines. No more

taxi or lorry drivers, fully automated shops - no more staff - etc., etc.

Within maximum 20-30 years it will be difficult for our own low educated

people (and some of the higher educated ones) to find work. Too many

immigrants now and in the future, and the situation for "the lower

classes" will go from difficult to impossible. And who shall feed the

jobless? The state? - it will cost mega-money in case. ## This will be the

reality for our next generation.




In life one often is attracted by one or some moral codes or ideologies, and

tries to stick to them. Within reasonable limits, this is ok. But there are at

least 2 cases, when it may cause trouble:


1. When religious, moral or political, etc. ideas or ideologies become

fanaticism - like what is the case for many an Islamist. Fanatics very often

are wrong, because "too little and too much are just as bad". They

forget that life has many facets, and drop all the other facets - often

destroying them also for other human beings - because of the ONE facet which

to them is the only thing which counts - in this case the provably made up

book the Quran, and the thus as made up religion of war based on it, Islam.


2. When 2 or more moral codes or ideologies collide.


In both cases the problems and their effects will be exacerbated if one only

listens to or reads arguments strengthening what one already wants to be the

reality, and poh-pohs everything else - what science names "thinking,

mode 1".


In this case there are moral codes like "people in need should be

helped" and ideologies like "every human being are and should be

treated equal", "racism is bad", etc. What many forget or

refuse to include when evaluating f.x. the situation of Muhammadan refugees,

are f.x. to differentiate between real refugees and "economic

refugees", but worse: That there also are moral codes and ideologies

telling fx. : "One should be careful when there are possible real

dangers", or: "Be careful not to expose other people, included your

descendants to danger", and f.x.: "When helping, one should do it in

ways best for all, not only for one part", not to mention: "It is

advisable to take into account not only the situation today, but also what may

happen in the future", and : "If there may be danger to my grandsons

and -daughters, etc., I should act accordingly".


When there are conflicting principles or moral codes, one must weigh them

against one another to find the best solution, not only follow one of them



It also is pretty ironic to claim to fight racism by aiding a political

"religion" at least as racist as Nazi Germany, the old South Africa

and the old South States in USA - and based on a book which on many points is

as harsh as "Mein Kampf", and provably a made up book.


In this case when taking everybody and all aspects into account, it may better

to help Muhammadan refugees in f.x. a neighboring Muhammadan country.



Spread this these facts as far and wide as possible, included on Facebook,

Twitter, etc. The more you spread it, the more it will be read. Remember:

Dishonesty, apartheid, suppression, violence, terrorism, and war are so

thoroughly integrated in the Quran and in Islam, that it will never come to an

end as long as Islam exists. Even though most Muhammadans are honest and

dislike violence, the hard core will always try to obey the Quran - blind

belief, and "fight the 'infidels' till they pay jizya (extra tax*) with

willing submission and feel themselves subdued" (9/29).


The only way to stop Muhammadan terrorism for ever, is to thoroughly spread

the proved facts about the Quran: That it provably  is not true that it is the

words of a god, and definitely not of an omniscient god.




(Essential books:

"1000+ Mistakes in the Quran"

"1000+ Comments on the Quran"

"Muhammad Lying in the Quran"

"The 13 Proofs" (for that the Quran is not from a god - a booklet

with permission included in this book.)

"The Reason for the Reasons behind Muslim Terrorism". (A booklet -

with permission included in this book.)


All on Amazon, some also on the net, f.x.





Chapter 5:





One of the famous slogans used by Muhammadans and Islam, is: "Islam is the religion of peace".  But to tell the plain fact: That slogan is an al-Taqiya - a lawful lie.


The Quran has more than 300 points glorifying violence, suppression, killing, and war, plus 300+ points inciting to or demanding the same. The best overview may be in "Verses of War in the Quran". Because of some overlap, it does not make 600 all together - we have seen the number 533 verses, but some verses have more than 1 point, so likely some place between 533 and 600 points directly promoting violence, racism, etc., and blood. We have seen, but not checked that 51% of the Quran's texts directly or indirectly are negative to non-Muhammadans. Also in the Hadiths there are MUCH such stuff.


As bad: The Quran has more than 1500 points mentioning "infidels", creating a picture of them as bad quality with bad intentions, and people deserving to be suppressed, robbed, and often enslaved or killed. Plus 950+ points mentioning Muhammadans, telling that they are the best quality (f.x. 3/110), and that they have the right and duty to fight, suppress, rob, enslave, or kill all and any non-Muhammadan - and rape any captive, not pregnant non-Muhammadan female - woman, youth or child. This rights may make you rich and give you many children. Perhaps this was the main reason why Islam suddenly started to grow rapidly after Muhammad started as a robber baron.


The duty to fight the non-Muhammadans partly is because Muhammad should have 20% of everything you stole and all the slaves you took (8/41), and partly to promote Islam - "no compulsion in religion" is one more untrue slogan from Islam.


The Quran and Islam also are very clear on that in a fight, you shall use any means to win (f.x. 9/5),. This includes terror - a fact which is strengthened f.x. by Muhammad's words: "I have been made victorious through terrorism" (Hadith, al-Bukhari, 4-52-220).


All this put together is the main reason why racism and Muhammadan terrorism never will come to a final end as long as some believe the Quran is the words of a god, and thus believe in its moral codes, etc. No matter how well treated, no matter how well paid jobs = no poverty, no matter how well accepted socially, and no matter other claimed explanations for Muhammadan radicalization and terrorism - no matter how well politicians and "infidels" erase all such "problems" for Muhammadan immigrants, the strong demands and orders in the Quran will always be there and lead some believers to do what the book advocates, glorifies, and demands.


Like it or not, and in spite of what is told to people, the only way to get permanently rid of Muhammadan terrorism, is to thoroughly spread the proofs for that it is not true that the Quran is from a god and represents a real religion. Until this is done, no matter what else is said or done, and no matter what happens, Muslim terrorism will live on - and reemerge if it all the same should be eradicated for some time.


We repeat: The likely strongest proof for that it is not true that the Qiran is the worss of a god - and likely the easiest one to document - is all the wrong facts, other errors, and contradictions in the Quran. (F.x. "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran".)


One either has to not know the Quran, or be very naive, or know little about human nature, to be able to believe it is possible to make a lasting end to Muhammadan violence, etc., as long as some groups believe the Quran is from a god.





Chapter 6:







The Quran's Heaven - or Heavens, as there are 7 "one above the other" (fx. 2/29, 17/44, 23/17, 23/86, 41/12, 65/12, 67/3, 71/15, 78/12), plus the one Allah live in above the 7. one - is very different from the reality, and also from the one of the Bible. The Quran's astronomically are in accordance with what one wrongly believed was correct astronomy in Persia and Greece at the time of Muhammad: 7 heavens explaining the 7 movements observed in the sky (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn + the Sun and the Moon) + the fixed stars above, sometimes called the 8. heaven. A serious difference is that the Quran tells that the fixed stars are fastened to the lowest heaven (41/12, 67/5), below the moon (71/16) and the sun (78/13), which both are between the heavens, something we today know would have made Earth extremely hot and this region of space extremely crowded.


The heavens rest on Earth by means of invisible pillars (13/2, 31/10) - but no human has ever found such a pillar, and no bird or airplane has ever collided with one. The heavens are made from material stuff - if not the stars could not be fastened to one of them, the large mansions the resurrected Muslims live in in Heaven could not be built there, the thrones resurrected Muslims sit on could not stand there, the fruit trees giving shade and fruits could not be there, the humans could not walk around or lay down - and rivers could not flow there, included the start of the Nile and Euphrates(!!)


The stars also double as shooting star to chase away jinns and bad spirits wanting to spy on the Heavens (67/5) - any god had known the difference between a star of zillions of cube kilometers and a shooting star of one or a few grams.


Also: No moon or other rocket ever collided with such a Heaven.


It seems that normal good Muslims end up in the lowest Heaven. This one is split in gardens - 4 or 6 or more or many more - one better than the other (the Quran indicates at least 4, and Hadiths indicate there may be more or many more). The better Muslim and the more ferocious a warrior you were on Earth, the more luxurious garden you end up in. Also you are promised that you will have your family  around you, but it is never explained how that is possible unless they all qualify for exactly the same garden as you, and also not about your daughters, if they are married into other families. Not to mention that it never explains how it will work after 10 - 100 - 1ooo generations: You have your sons and women and houris around you, your sons have their families and houris around them, all your grandsons have their families and houris around them, your great grandsons - - -. It will be pretty crowded after 100 generations.




Similar goes for the higher heavens, where the specially deserving Muslims go. How many of f.x. Muhammad's family and descendants did qualify to the 7. Heaven like Muhammad and Abraham? Are the two nearly alone there, because hardly anybody could qualify for the same as Muhammad and Abraham? Well, of course he has his houris and servants, but but for that?


What pastimes are there in Heave? Little or nothing. Nothing but laziness to do. No debates and nothing to do. Only good food and drink and the houris.


The houris are special women and sex slaves in Paradise - nobody knows from where they come, except that the idea is borrowed from a Pagan religion in Persia, the Zoroastrians. A really ferocious warrior or terrorist may have up to 72 (plus his wives and perhaps his sex slaves/concubines from Earth (this last is not clear from the Quran), if they are able to compete with the beautiful houris). But to tell you a secret: Even sex may be boring in the long run, if that is your only pastime.


Well, and there are the handsome, young male servants. Officially Islam is strongly against homosexuality, but these servants are described in ways which must be tempting for homosexuals - and after all homosexuality was and partly is silently accepted in many Muslim areas - some places even reckoned to be the 3. gender. There are speculations about if Muhammad introduced these handsome youths at least partly to have a temptation also for homosexual warriors, etc.


What is sure, is that Muhammad borrowed this Paradise with its houris and servants from that pagan Persian religion. Literally nothing is new in Islam's religion. And another sure thing is that this Paradise is galaxies away from the one of the Bible, where you "become like the angels".



Nowadays also Muhammadans know that there are no solid heavens up there. But they HAVE to find something, if not the Quran is seriously wrong. The most common "explanation" is that Muhammad meant layers in the atmosphere.


There are 2 or 3 different ways of splitting the atmosphere in layers, resulting in some 15 different layers - more if you add subdivisions. Islam has picked the number 7 - we have never seen specified which layers - and claim these are the 7 Heavens. Often they even claim that this is a proof for that the Quran is from Allah, because Muhammad impossibly could know that there are 7 layers in the atmosphere!!. They NEVER mention that there really are many more. Also they never explain f.x.:


 1. The lowest Heaven has to be on top of the lowest layer, the Troposphere (the border between the Troposphere and the Stratosphere is named the Tropopause, and is a diffuse, thick, and moving layer). It is roughly 10 km/6 miles up. How could the stars be fastened to a diffuse layer of air?

 2. If the stars were fastened to something 10 km up - even only one of the many stars - what would happen to Earth?

 3. If the Heavens are layers in the atmosphere, how can then the sun and the moon be between the heavens, like the Quran says?

 4. Shooting stars normally burns and are destroyed in the Stratosphere. How can that be if the stars are nailed to the  Tropopause = below the Stratosphere?

 5. The heavens are kept up there by means pillars holding them. How can pillars hold in place difuce and moving layers of air?

 6. In the heavens there are beautiful mansions, thrones, etc. How can they be built on difuce, unstable, and moving layers of air?

 7. In the heavens there are shady trees, fruit trees, lush grass, etc. How can they grow and stay put in thin air?

 8. There also are nice rivers - included the start of the Nile and Euphrates. How can they run on/in thin air?

 9. The top the Troposphere - the Tropopause - must be the the lowest Heaven. According to the Quran, humans are resurrected bodily. How can physical humans walk or lay down on or in a difuce border layer a number of hundred meters thick and wobbling some up and down, between 2 layers of the atmosphere?

10. Just there you have a some 5 km thick layer of trade winds - a jet stream - from the west, constantly blowing at hurricane force or more - from some 150 km/h to unbelievable 700+ km/h (hurricane = ca. 120 km/h). How can this give a heavenly life? (There are jet streams also higher up.)

11. Also the temperature there is some minus 60-65 C. Does that give a heavenly life? And how can f.x. fruit trees grow?

12. The UV rays are strong up there. Do resurrected humans have protective clothes and anti-UV creams?

13. That high up the air is too thin for humans to breath. Do they get oxygen masks?

14. The higher up the colder (with some exceptions), the thinner air, the worse UV, and in addition there are the hard rays from the universe. Muhammad in the 7. Heaven and perhaps minus 200 C - depending on how high that Heaven is situated - practically no air, lots of hard rays and UV , and perhaps a jet stream - yes, he really lives in a deserved Paradise.


This is a case you all too often meet from Muhammadans: They find a seemingly solution to one aspect of a problem or an error,  but overlook that other aspects of it make the "solution" or "explanation" impossible. (They f.x. have a similar "explanation" concerning the claimed 7 Earths.)


Finally one enigma concerning the Qurans Paradise: Is it not forever? One verse (11/107) raises that question. Muhammadans tell that this in case means that the believers will be moved to an even better place, but this is not said in the Quran.







Hell in the Quran is fire, horrible food, horrible things to drink, and pure sadism.


There are 7 gates into Hell, each leading to a place worse than the other (15/44). You have to stay in the fire, and as soon as your skin is roasted through (and the pain is lessened because the nerve cells are destroyed), Allah gives you new skin (4/56). In Hell, like in Heaven, you need to eat and drink (why? - you cannot die away from hell anyhow), and both are horrible.


There is one small comfort, as it is not sure Hell lasts forever (6/128, 11/107, 78/23). Some Muslim scholars think this may mean that at least Muslims - sinful Muslims who have ended in Hell, but after all are Muslims - perhaps will get out in the end, after a very long time.


Hadiths tell that Hell is placed under the 7 (flat) Earths, and that bad sinners living when the Day of Doom comes, may fall through the Earths and into Hell.







Chapter 7





(A reminder first: "An omniscient god never errs". This is confirmed also by the Quran (f.x. 4/82, 20/52) = if there are errors in a book, they prove that the book is not from a god.


Another reminder: Spread the facts below as far and wide as you can, because at least in Europe too many are not aware of these facts - Europe lived through the horrors of the Nazism, "and the Nazism was so horrendous, that nothing can be so bad that it ks comparable to that". But did Islam behave as bad - or worse - f.x. to the black Africans or against the Hindus? 120 million dead in Africa. Perhaps 80 million Hindus only up to 1525 AD. Etc. Then the dead from slave hunting and transport and the killing of mulatto babies are not included (Only these last ones may be more numerous than the ones dead because of the Nazis - yes, perhaps more than all dead during WWII). Dead Hindus? The numbers vary from tens of millions and up to 400 million (but 400 million may be boasting - boasting about mass murder, grand scale). Hitler was just a kindergarten boy in comparison. But most from the West are not aware of this, as they know little about non-European history, and have bad conscience for the former colonies, and react from feelings because of this and from empathy with the poor ones in dire need, not from real knowledge or the use of their brain. And also not knowing that some colony masters through the times have been worse masters than "the White Man").




Well, parallels between the Quran and "Mein Kampf" is a touchy point, as Hitler, the Nazis, and their behavior during WW2 tend to be reckoned to be the ultimate inhumanity, and that nothing can be so bad that it can be compared to that.


But through history there has happened as bad deeds as the ones done by the Nazis. And worse. Though sometimes not in as short time.


The political ideas in the Quran are pretty far out. Professionals, f.x. the world renown Danish psychologist Carl Gustav Young in the 1930s commented on this - compared Islam to just the Nazis (a socialist party - "the National Socialists") . But today most people are not aware of that Islam is not a religion, but a religious political idea, and they also are not aware of how far out many of those ideas are. It is a little ironic when political left strongly defends Islam from ideologies about freedom of speech and common hatred of Christianity, common hatred of USA, Israel, etc., etc. - without really knowing what they are supporting.


Others just think that a religion is a religion, and humans are humans - which not always are correct. Or they react with empathy towards people in difficulties.


Some general points:

The similarities between the Quran and Hitler's "Mein Kampf" like said is a touchy topic, as Hitler and the Nazis and their behavior during WW2, in the West tends to be reckoned as the ultimate inhumanity (even though the Japanese were about as bad in Asia), and that nothing can be so bad that it can be compared to that.


All the same it has repeatedly been indicated - or said - that on many points Islam can be compared to the Nazism. Like mentioned f.x. the world renown psychologist Carl Gustav Young compared the two.


Because of this question we have studied also "Mein Kampf" some, and we have to admit there are more parallels than what cozy is. This goes for both fundamental thoughts, advises about what methods (of violence) to use, use of propaganda/dishonesty/lies, promotion of racism, apartheid, etc., etc.


It is obvious Hitler had been thinking things over - more so than the disordered and error filled texts in the Quran indicate deep thinking from Allah or Muhammad - and that he was intelligent (like also Muhammad was). But to what avail when the starting points are fixed ideas, racism, and conspiracy theories? Especially in Muhammad's book it is easy to see the lust for respect, power, and riches - the last mainly for bribery for more power (and for women - all together he had at least 36 known by name + an unknown number of rapes (at least 2)).


Well, what are the parallels between the Quran and Mein Kampf? - Hitler's classical example of that strong ideas and much thinking far from always give a masterpiece if it is based on "thinking, mode 1": "I believe what I prefer to believe, I only see  the facts I want to see, and claims are treated as facts if they are in accordance with my ideas, and what I do not want to believe, I claim is wrong, conspiracy claims, or I simply dismiss it".




1. Both books claim to be the top on their subject, but are built on among other things lots of claims which are not facts (fx. the Quran's very many wrong facts, and a number of Hitler's claims about "realities" in the world). A parallel.


2. The fundamental thinking are parallels: "I am the one who am right", "'We' are the only ones who deserve power, because it is 'we' who represent the true and good moral and values and the good ideas for the people (- and for the leader). Etc. The parallels are rather striking. The same when it comes to suppression of and apartheid/racism against others, "Lebensraum", and ruling of the world. As for apartheid, suppression, kill the opponents, and "rule the world", the Quran actually is clearer than "Mein Kampf".


3. Another parallel: Hitler never proved his central theories or claims. Nor did Muhammad/the Quran ever prove central theories or claims. F.x. not one of Muhammad's some 500 claimed "signs" or "proofs" for Allah, is valid, unless Islam first proves that it really was and is Allah who causes what are claimed to be such proofs.


4. Personality cult. Very parallel, but the Quran much stronger such cult than "Mein Kampf".


5. Conspiracy theories: The Quran is at least as strongly blaming opponents for using conspiracy.


6. Hitler made a number of errors in Mein Kampf. Fx. for the Jews to be the cause of everything Hitler claimed, the average Jews have to be supermen. The Quran has LOTS of wrong facts (unbelievable 1750+), other non-religious errors (350+), and contradictions (300+) ("1000+ Mistakes in the Quran".) Neither book has quality controlled their claims, and have a number of errors. A parallel, but at least in number of errors the Quran is far worse than Mein Kampf.


7. Final goal: Total world dominance. A parallel.


8. Total control of all followers and all central ideas. A parallel. (Fx. 4/115, 8/39, 9/33).


9. Total autocracy. A parallel. (Fx. "Der Furer denkt fur uns" ("the Leader thinks for us"), vs. fx. 2/285, 4/80, 4/115.)


10. The principle of a total autocracy under one "Fürer" or "Leader" is similar. (Fx. 4/80, 24/51, 24/63, 33/36.). In the Quran the title is "prophet" (even though Muhammad did not have a prophet's powers (fx. 3/179, 6/50, 7/188, 10/49)) or "messenger". A clear parallel.


11.  "The Case" shall count more for you than your family or friends (fx. 9/23). Parallel, but stronger said and demanded in the Quran than in Mein Kampf.


12.  Absolutely everybody with other ideas then the Leader's ones, should - and shall, now and for ever - be suppressed or killed. The Quran possible is the bloodiest here, as it prescribes that absolutely everybody with ideas different from "ours" should be suppressed or killed, whereas Mein Kampf primarily would take on the Jews, the communists, and perhaps the Negroes, plus some minor groups. Plus in Nazism the ones who "lost/lose their faith" should be punished, but not necessarily killed, whereas the Quran advises to kill them. A parallel and then some.


13. The use of dishonesty and lies are in both books advised means to use for to win. The Nazism had  "The Department for Propaganda" and Joseph Gobbels. The Quran had and still has accepted concepts like:

    A. Al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending or circumventing). These 3 are built on verses in the Quran like 4/142 (when Allah can overreach, that is ok for Muhammadans, too), 8/30 (when Allah can make "smart" plans, it is ok also for Muhammadans to do so, too), 10/21, 13/42, 27/50, 86/15-16. (Remember: The correct name is "Muhammadans"(followers of Muhammad), not Muslims, as it provably is untrue that the Quran is the words of a god. See f.x. "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran", "Muhammad Lying in the Quran", "The 13 proofs", on Amazon.)

    B. Lawful cheating, lawful deceit, lawful betrayal. These are based on words claimed to be from Muhammad in Hadith , like "War is deceit", "War is betrayal" - and "everything" is war - and on deeds done by Muhammad, like f.x. the 30 man strong peace delegation from Khaybar, which was promised safe return, but which Muhammad deceived and slaughtered - 1 managed to flee).

    C. Lawful disuse and breaking of words and even oaths as working tools. This is based on verses like 2/225, 3/54 (when Allah can make smart plans, it also is permitted for his followers), 5/89, 16/91, 66/2.

    A rather immoral parallel.


14. Accusations against opposite parts for that what they say - included correct facts - are lies. Mein Kampf is very clear on - though no proofs - that all medias disagreeing with Hitler, were dominated by the Jews, and lied and falsified facts. The Quran is at least as clear - though no proofs (actually proved wrong) - that f.x. the Jews and Christians had falsified the Bible (fx. 2/79, 3/24). A clear and easy to see parallel.


15. Lawful stealing/looting. Here also Hitler was efficient, but in the Quran this is official policy on all levels (fx. 3/174, 4/94, 8/1, 8/41. NB: The top boss/Muhammad shall have 20% of everything stolen, extorted, and slaves taken, (8/41), 8/69 even stating that this is "lawful and good", and 48/15 indicating the same. A lopsided parallel - heavier on the side of the Quran.


For some reason Muhammadans and Islam often claim - no proofs, though - that Islam is "the Religion of Truth" (which all the wrong facts, etc. In the Quran prove is not true),  but even they seldom claim that "Islam is the Religion of Honesty".


16. The Nazi silently accepted that their soldiers stole and robbed and raped. But the Quran goes one step further, as this is the accepted payment for its warriors. F.x. 8/41 (80% is for the warriors). Parallel and more.


17. Similar to points 11 and 12 is stealing of grounds, farms, house and home: F.x. 10/14, 32/2, 33/27. Also here the Quran at least has clearer - and wide - rules. Parallel and more.


18. Lawful rape. Also here the Quran has clearer - and very wide - rules, compared to Mein Kampf. Nazis made plenty of rapes, but Mein Kampf does not mention this phenomenon, neither as a means for terror, nor as payment or a right for its soldiers. Verses like 8/69, 23/6, 33/50, 70/30, makes it VERY clear that such things are "lawful and good" (8/69). A clear parallel to the realities among the Nazis, but the Quran 'wins" when it comes to giving clear permission to rape slaves and captive, not pregnant women and girl children.


19. Pedophilia. This really is not a topic in any of the two books. But Islam had and has no minimum age for sex with girl children, and Muhammad's example with his child wife documents that it in any case is lawful from the child is 9 years old. But no girl is sexually mature at 9 years. One more point where at least the codes of moral, if not the letters of the books, are harder than the Nazi ones. A loop-sided parallel.


20. Slave taking and holding. Hitler did use lots of slave workers, but in the Quran both slave taking and slave holding are officially sanctioned both politically and religiously, and not a sin, and slave taking is part of the "wages" for the warriors. One of the points where the Quran and Islam are harsher than Nazism and Mein Kampf. One more loop-sided parallel.


An argument used among Muhammadan hardliners even today: "It is as great a sin to prohibit something Allah permits - f.x. slave taking, slave keeping, rape of slaves and captive, not pregnant, women and children - as to permit something Allah prohibits". Yes, this is part of the religion, culture, and political group named Islam.


21. The use of violence. This is strongly recommended in both books. Hitler f.x. had SA and SS, the Quran literally hundreds of glorification of, incitements and orders to using violence ("Verses of War in the Quran"), plus Muhammad's practice of violence (Muhammad's 10 years in Medina were as full of violence - like IS, Boko Haram, al-Chabaab today). The white race is no worse than some others - on this and several other points. At least a parallel - perhaps more. At least far more dead humans - and counting - than the puny 20-30 million Mein Kampf caused. (The rest of the deaths during WWII, like said mainly were from the war against Japan.)


22. Point of view on women. The Quran here clearly is harsher than Mein Kampf, both when it comes to general point of view, and when it comes to fx. how to treat captive females. Hardly a parallel - the Quran trumps Mein Kampf, which is not very negative to women.


23. Terŕorism. Strongly advised in both books. I quote Muhammad in Hadith, al-Bukhari, 4-52-220: "I have been made successful through terrorism", but also the Quran itself is strong on "fight with any means" (f.x. 9/5). The Quran at least parallel to Mein Kampf.


24. Racism (remember that discrimination because of religion is defined as a kind of racism). Also here the Quran tops Mein Kampf. The Quran f.x. contains some 1500 points negative to non-Muhammadans (this list is not on the net, but I have got a copy, checked on it, and it seems correct). Excellent basis for discrimination and racism. At least a parallel, even though Mein Kampf uses some strong words, especially against Jews and communists.


25. Reverse racism. The Quran also contains at least 950 points which tell how much better Muhammadans are than everybody else (f.x. 3/110), and that Muhammadans should keep others at arm's length, fight them, suppress them, or kill them. Also Hitler boasted of his SS, SA, etc. Reverse racism also is racism. Comments like point 20 just above. Another parallel.


26. The missing mulatto babies. Like told before: Some 3.5-4 million black slave women were imported to the Americas through 300 years, mainly for work. They now have some 180 mill descendants. Some 25 mill. black women and girl children were imported to Muhammadan countries during 1400 years for sex slavery. With 7 times as many as many as in the Americas, and with much longer time to "multiply", and their "work" sex,  there should have been 1-2 billion descendants. You see for yourself that f.x. in Turkey, Arabia, Iraq, Iran, etc. there are practically no native mulattoes, etc. "Nigger" blood in the family was too much of a shame, so the babies were killed by its fathers or his families, even though to kill your own children is prohibited in the Quran - a sin. (F.x. "African Echo", 21. Dec. 2017). Perhaps 50 mill. babies murdered? - approximately twice as many as died because of the Nazis in case. At least the Muhammadan culture, if not the Quran itself, strongly tops the Nazis on this point. (And the West is busy importing Muhammadan culture at present. Well, to kill mulatto babies I believe has come to an end, but to kill your own children for "reasons of honor" still happens.) Hardly a parallel - the Quran dwarfs Mein Kampf on this point.


27. War. This is the topmost mean of power, and also to acquire power,  in both books. The Quran like said has 300+ points glorifying the use of violence, and another 300+ which incite to or demand the same. ("Verses of war in the Quran".)  Mein Kampf is as harsh on this point as the Quran, but the Quran repeats it much more often, and then stresses it much more. At least parallel to Mein Kampf.


28. Mistreatment of prisoners of war. The Nazis treated prisoners of war in such ways that many died. The Quran straight out says that: "It is not fitting for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he has thoroughly subdued the land" (8/67). To keep prisoners of war takes resources and men - better to kill the prisoners instead. And what is not fitting for a prophet, of course is not fitting for other Muhammadans, too. A parallel and then some.


29. Hate. Like mentioned the Quran contains some 1500 + 950 points which promotes distaste, contempt, racism, apartheid, and hate. In addition there are 300+ plus 300+ points (the sum is less than 600 because of some overlap) points which glorify, incite to, or order fighting, suppression, of killing of all non-Muhammadans. Excellent nourishment for distaste, contempt, and hate. Mein Kampf incites to hate against Jews, communists, and some others. Parallel, but the Quran with its 1500 + 950 + 600 = 3ooo+ reminders, tops Mein Kampf both in volume and in how many who shall be looked on with contempt and distaste and be hated: All non-Muhammadans (= the Quran tops in spite of that Mein Kampf some places like said uses strong words.)


30. The basic political ideas is far out on the right hand side. (Demonstrated fx. during WWII by Muhammadans' co-operation with the Nazis.) That also Mein Kampf does. Parallel. (Well, Hitler's party really was named National Socialist German Workers Party (Nationalsozialisiche Deutche Arbeiterpartei - NSDAP), but all the same is reckoned to lean to the right.)


31. Parallel in torture? Both the Nazis and Muslims are known for the use of torture during conflicts, etc. F.x. Muhammad and Kinanan - Muhammad tortured him to death to make him divulge hidden treasures Muhammad would steal - and raped his newlywed 17 year old wife, Safiyya bint Huayay, the same night. Numbers are difficult to find, but one more parallel.


32. Parallels in killings?

The Nazis:                                      Some 20-30 million.

Islam, basic number:                Some 270 million because of the "religion" during 1400 years. (120 mill. in Africa, the rest mainly in                                                                    :                                                          Asia, though a few million also i  Europe).

During slave hunt/transport: Perhaps 190 million dead - because of Muhammadans making "easy" money.

Killed Mulatto babies:               Likely some 50 million because of misleading "honor" rules.


Are Hitler's pitiful 20-30 million a parallel to Islam's perhaps 500+ million?


33. Random killing/murder. This was frequently used by both, and still is used by both, but more by Muhammadans. At least a parallel.


34. Some claim that Hitler and "Mein Kampf" were horrible - costing 20-30 million lives - the rest of the deaths during WW2 like said mainly was caused by the war started by Japan (you may find higher numbers). 20-30 million died because of an inhuman political idea, raised to nearly a religion.  For comparison and to repeat: The research group CSPI has found that Islam TILL NOW has cost 270 million lives, and the killing and even slave taking still goes on. In addition there were the death from slave taking and save transport - we have seen the number 190 million - and the murdered babies of the ca. 25 million black sex slaves imported to Muhammadan regions in the Muddle East, etc., murdered by their father or his family because a mulatto child in the family was too much of a shame. We have seen the number 50 million (2 babies for each sex slave are not unrealistic in times when women normally got 4 or 6 or even more).


510(?) million killed because of a provably made up book, and thus a provably made up and politicized  "religion". No matter how wrong this number may be, it is FAR worse than the result of "Mein Kampf".


35. Go looking, and you may find more parallels.



Conclusion: There are far more parallels between "Mein Kampf"/Nazism and the Quran/Islam that what is comfortable. (This you may show to any person or media refusing to believe there are parallels between "Mein Kampf" and the Quran, and between Nazism and Islam - like you see, on some points the Quran and Islam is even harsher than "Mein Kampf" and the Nazis.


And what about a comparison between Muhammad and his small disciples, the leaders of IS, Boco Haram, al-Cahabab, etc.? (They are the ones who are living according to the Quran's and Muhammad's words and moral codes.)



Or a comparison between Muhammad and Hitler?






To repeat and think over:

The Nazis are the worst West Europe has experienced. Because of that it like said is difficult for us to at all think that something can have been worse. The Nazism for us in the West is the ultimate in terrorism and inhuman deeds. These thoughts are strengthened by that not many have much knowledge about horror histories far off, in Africa and Asia - nothing can have been worse than the Nazis!! "To compare Islam to the Nazis is to strongly cross the red line", an editor told me some months ago.


But take a look at what inhumanity non-Muhammadans have met at times and places, take a look at the misery of the millions of slaves, the millions of rapes, the millions wounded, the millions tortured, the millions of killed and murdered - and the treatment of "infidels" at times and places through history, and think over if you agree with him.




A. If you find any error in these pages, please inform us. There are so much wrong and so many "special" points in the Quran, that it is totally unnecessary to use any made up or misunderstood stories or arguments.


B. A last reminder: Dishonesty (fx. Al-Taqiyya, lawful disuse or breaking of words and laths, etc.etc.) and violence are so integrated parts of the Quran and Islam, that it is not possible to bring Muhammadan terrorism to a final end, as long as some "believers" really believe the Quran is the words of a god. Because of that, information like this should be spread as far and wide as possible, and the same and to an even higher degree should the knowledge to books and booklets like "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran", "Muhammad Lying in the Quran", "the 13 Proofs", be spread. They strongly prove that the never proved claim that the Quran is words of a god, is wrong. We may also mention "1000+ Comments on the Quran", Amazon.




Chapter 8:


(The Quran is the root of Islam.)




Islam is a foreign element among religions today, as it clearly is an

apartheid, suppression, violence, and war religion, and with dishonesty as

lawful working tools. The book "Verses of War in the Quran" like

mentioned lists no less than 300+ points glorifying violence, suppression, and

murder as an all round solution to what to do with non-Muhammadans who would

not from "free will" convert to Islam. Plus more than 300 points

inciting to or ordering the same. (Because of some overlap it like said adds

up to a little less than 600.)


That Islam is "a foreign matter" among religions, is strengthened by

the demand that they shall use any and all means to win, no matter how base or

immoral or inhuman. (F.x. Muhammad in Hadith, al-Bukhari, 4/52/220: "I

have been made victorious through terrorism". The Quran also a couple of

places says you shall act without mercy against opponents.)


"The Religion of Peace"?? - a nice claim, but a clear al-Taqiyya

(lawful lie). No religion with that much slander and racism and that many

incitements and orders to racism, suppression, violence and blood, is a

religion of peace.



Islam further is a "foreign matter" among religions also in that it

is a strictly racist and apartheid religion (remember that discrimination

because of religion, by definition is a kind of racism). Hinduism had

something similar in it's layered construction, but they after all have fought

the nonsense for decades. We have not seen one single proposal from central

Islamic circles about corrections to the Quran about such things. We repeat:

There are some 1500+ points in the Quran directly or indirectly telling that

"the infidels" are bad humans, rather stupid, and

"Untermensch", and thus people one should keep at a distance.

Excellent material for cultivation of discrimination, apartheid, and racism.

In addition there are the 300+ points glorifying violence against and

suppression or killing of all non-Muhammadans, plus as many points inciting to

or demanding the same ("Verses of War in the Quran"). Even stronger

manure for racism.  And then there are the mentioned some 950+ points telling

how good the Muhammadans are - "Übermensch" - and about their

rights and duty to fight and rob the lousy and lowly "infidels". A

duty to fight them as it gave Allah/Muhammad more power, a duty to rob,

because Allah/Muhammad should have 20% of everything stolen and slaves taken

(8/41), (included of course of the rights to rape all their female slaves and

captive, not pregnant women and girl children (fx. 8/69, 23/6, 33/50, 70/30)).

More manure for the same - in this case factory made, artificial manure, but

it really did and does work.


We like said have seen that 51% of the texts in the Quran, directly or

indirectly are negative stuff about or related to non-Muhammadans. The claim

may be wrong, but not too much wrong. Solid foundation for racism, anti

integration, etc., and a black fact many non-Muhammadans are not aware of. One

often knows some about the war and suppression verses, but  not how

comprehensive, wide, and strong the downgrading of and bad words about the

non-Muhammadans are, and the boasting about or upgrading of the claimed

excellent Muhammadans, together creating an abyss between Muhammadans and

'Infidels" - and the arguments and orders for to keep those lowly and bad

"Plebeis" and unclean non-believers at a distance, and for

suppressing or killing them. The Quran makes the "ground" very

fertile for what we have been talking about: Keep a distance, suppress,

practice apartheid, rob, take slaves, rape, kill - and anti integration - - -

facts NEVER  mentioned or debated how to tackle the problems, when politicians

and idealists tell the world how much more we have to do and how much more

money to spend, to make integration easier for our Muhammadan "brothers

and sisters".


The Quran through and through is religiously based racism and anti integration.


The future of our grandchildren?



Another point far too many are not aware of: In most religions the demand for

honesty in words and deeds is more or less an absolute, while in Islam there

are wide rules for lawful dishonesty - in deeds and in words:


To steal/rob during and after raids, battles, and war is "lawful and

good" (fx. 8/69, 48/15) - 20% to Allah/Muhammad (8/41), included to steal

house and farm and home from the victims (f.x. 10/14, 32/26, 33/27).


Similar also goes for lawful slave taking (to steal somebody's life, future,

work capacity, etc. - Mohammad was a great slave taker (likely at least 2ooo

just in Khaybar) , and this "proves" that it is morally ok), and for

lawful rape - to steal and/or destroy somebody's body, sexual capacity, child

bearing capacity, happiness, etc. (fx. 8/69, 23/6, 33/50, 70/30 and Muhammad's

example (he did some rapes)). One also has the words from the Quran, that it

is a sin to forbid what Allah permits - and Allah very strongly permits slave

taking, selling/buying, keeping - and raping.


And there is the dishonesty in words. We repeat it to impress it on your

brain, because it is so essential, but something too many non-Muhmmadans are

not aware of: Al-Taqiya (lawful lie), Kitman (lawful half-truth), Hilah

(lawful pretending or circumventing) - these are based on verses like 8/30,

13/42, 27/50 (when Allah may "make plans", that of course is ok for

Muhammadans, too). Further one has "lawful deceit", "lawful

betrayal", etc. (based on words from Muhammad in Hadiths, and on f.x. the

example made by the murder of the peace delegation from Khaybar, which he had

promised safe return).


And one has the lawful disuse or breaking of words and even oaths (2/225,

5/89, 16/91, 66/2)  which is permitted in at least 10 wide cases like cheating

women or to secure one's money (relevant when cheating on social security in

countries where there is such?). Lawful to use in many cases, and ought to be

used "if necessary" to defend or promote Islam. Pay expiation

afterwards if the sin is great.


In serious cases where Islam or Muhammadans are the opposite part, it may be

wise to ask for clear proofs in addition to words or oaths.



The lawful slavery and slave hunting: Today it is prohibited by law also in

the Muhammadan countries, after serious and prolonged pressure from the West -

the last country, Mauritania, as late as in unbelievable 2007 AD - but some

places the laws are far from strictly enforced, and slavery and slave taking

still religiously are completely ok and no sin: "It is as great a sin to

prohibit something Allah permits, as to permit something Allah prohibits"

- fractions within Islam still say it. IS, Boko Haram, Al-Shabaab and other

show that slavery, included sex slavery, re-emerges where conservative Islam

gets the upper hand, and believe they do not have to mind what others say.

Also outside those circles, slavery is defended even today - slavery do exist

also today in some countries, though officially prohibited. According to UN

there today are "some 24 million humans living as slaves or in slave-like

conditions", a very measurable percent of them in Muhammadan areas.

(There are indications for that 2 or 3 in Muhammad's harem, out of of the 7

known by name, but not known if he was married to or not, simply were sex