Early conclusions on the Quran.

Following on from my last post I have been listening to LBC, the issues discussed have been citizens that are using the European Freedom of Movement rules and issues with Islam, with a nod to the recent survey in which 55% of Europeans did not want migration from Muslim countries to happen at all.

It reminds me of the fact I am reading the Quran, the religious book of 1.6 million people and the second largest religion on earth.

Firstly, the point in both of these subjects, is that the government is making effort to increase tension, which is of course highly likely. With the Muslim migration issue why are there entire streets of only Muslims? Rather like historically in England, there are rich and poor areas placed together so that services do not degrade, (because the rich are very capable at making sure services stay at a good level). If the government wanted Muslims to integrate surely they would not push them into Muslim only zones?

With the issue with European migration, someone clearly is hoping that creating problems with British expats versus EU nationals living in Britain, that this conflict will bring a push back to stay in the European Union!

The Quran:

I am far too early in this book to be making judgements and/ or conclusions. The reason I am writing about this is that it is fairly emotionally heavy document and I need to express it.

I am up to Quran 3:26. I am taking notes on the Quran. For instance, this is the only statement that I have found in any way positive in the book thus far:

224. And make not Allah's (Name) an excuse in your oaths against your doing good and acting piously, and making peace among mankind. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower (i.e. do not swear much and if you have sworn against doing something good then give an expiation for the oath and do good).

Although there are other statements that might broadly be perceived as positive, very often in this book the statement before or after nullify's the positivity of that particular statement.

There is a difference with the Quran and the Bible. The Bible full of a metaphorical and mysterious language, for instance, the part where Legion is exorcised from a possessed man, and there are loads of beautiful statements in it, and even insightful statements into human psychology: 'The wicked man in his pride doth persecute the poor'.

From what I have read of the Quran thus far, and this is clearly my perception. But it seems a book that is less intending to communicate the fascination that is evident of an infinite creator, and more intent on creating a loyalty to a diety.

Everything is brought back to Allah, the narrative is unable to explore a story outside of this insistence, and these statements are sometimes intimidating, and dressed up in words designed to sound religious but on closer evaluation being more to create intimidation:

'Allah is severe in punishment.' Is repeated oft.
'Allah is all hearer, all knower' - Or similar, sounds good at first but then you realise the intent is more to create fear that a supernatural entity is watching a person rather than any sort of exploration of the larger implications of infinity.
'Allah is the most wise, the most merciful' Again no discussion of what this might mean, and it is directly contradicted that Allah is at all merciful in most of the book, for instance:

Q2:253: If Allah had willed, succeeding generations would not have fought against each other, after clear Verses of Allah had come to them, but they differed - some of them believed and others disbelieved. If Allah had willed, they would not have fought against one another, but Allah does what He likes.

This books seems more to me like a political tract than a religion!

Larger politics:

David Seaman, David Wilcock and Benjamin Fulford seem at the moment to be quite frankly... Stressed. David Seaman is convinced mass arrests are going to happen soon. Probably, he was not there in 2011 when David Wilcock was coming out with the same assertions. He has not experienced the fact that these people are less capable than they purport to be (or perhaps the negative is more capable.)

I wonder whether these writers, and others, have never been concerned with Islam as a larger issue because if the things they were trying to achieve happens they believed the harder aspects of fanatical Islam would become less of a problem.

For instance, terrorism in my belief, all the major attacks, 9/11, Berlin, Brussels, Paris, are false flags that have co- operation from specialist Western military forces and elements of their government. Clearly, if these were arrested and the attacks stopped, plus the charging of people like Tony Blair for war crimes and crimes against humanity, then this will effect Islam... Will it stop the fanaticism? Doubtful but it is likely many people believe that the problems will stop there.

Also, after such a time we would be seeing contact with extra terrestrial races; in studies the cabal have done the people most effected by this will be religious people and scientist, (so, if we include Darwin as a religion because it certainly isn't scientifically valid, we could then shorted that to "religious people"). Really, when there is enough disclosure, likely many, many belief systems will go the way of the dinosaur.

But I'm not sure this is completely correct; disclosure is taking time and I do not know that anyone will be arrested for a long time yet and in the mean time, we have Geert Wilders and Marine Le Pen likely to be elected in their respective countries. One of the callers into Nigel Farage's show went to a mosque and the Imam was saying that Allah had given England to the Muslims.

Conclusion:

I believe that if there is to be any renaissance of Islam, it will come from Iran, or Iran will be on side. Iran is using it's Shi- ite militias to aid Syria, that is a secular country, and they oppose Saudi Arabia directly. Even though Iran has the barbarism associated with many Muslim countries, it is less so than Saudi Arabia, and you have to start somewhere. (Regrettably not Libya!)

I also believe, as I have outlined, that Saudi Arabia is using manipulative tactics that even Trump will not oppose to keep America in its pocket. All Trump is doing in relation to the Muslim world at the moment seems to be increasing the tension with Iran, that are close allies of Russia and China, and is fighting one of the worst cancers the modern world has seen in the form of Da'esh.

Regardless, we will just have to see. If Geert Wilders is elected and the country erupts into a civil war then people in the West are going to look at the Netherlands and wonder if their own countries Muslim population are a stonesthrow away from creating similar amounts of trouble.