Introspection of Islam
Very few, if any, Muslims ever reflect upon their faith because:
Allah has hated you for asking too many questions about religion
Qur’an 5:101 “Believers, ask not questions about things which if made plain to you may cause you trouble when the Qur’an is revealed. Some people before you asked questions, and on that account lost their faith.”
Maududi, in his commentary, The Meaning of the Qur’an, explains: “The Prophet forbade people to ask questions or to pry into such things.”
Volume 2, Book 24, Number 555:
The clerk of Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba narrated, “Muawiya wrote to Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba: Write to me something which you have heard from the Prophet (p.b.u.h) .” So Al-Mughira wrote:
I heard the Prophet saying, “Allah has hated for you three things:
1. Vain talks, (useless talk) that you talk too much or about others.
2. Wasting of wealth (by extravagance)
3. “And asking too many questions (in disputed religious matters)” or asking others for something (except in great need).
Introspection: Asking too many question about Islam could be an indication of “loss of their faith in Islam.” This shuts the mouths of all Muslims. This is why Muslims are so retarded about their knowledge not only of their own faith but of science and the world about them.
|The Most Concise Definition of God:|
This absolute belief provides Islam with its supremacist views of the world. It also provides the Muslims to believe that they are superior to the rest of the world. (The world population is 7 Billion and the Muslim Population is 1.8 Billion or 24% of the world population.)
IQ al Rassooli is Liberty GB’s expert advisor on Islam. 
ISLAMIC SUPREMACISM is the belief that Islam is superior to other religions, cultures, and governmental systems, and the belief that Islam’s superiority entitles Muslims to dominate, control, and rule non-Muslims.
Islam is a supremacist religion. The Hadith and Qur’an command every Muslim to strive until Islam dominates all other religions. The Qur’an says very clearly that the only legitimate form of government is Allah’s. According to mainstream, well-established Islamic teachings, the goal of Islam is to make the whole world submit to the law of Allah (Shari’a).
If Islam is an inherently supremacist religion, then the term “Islamic supremacism” is redundant. Simply “Islam” will do. But I often use the term “Islamic supremacism” rather than simply “Islam” because first of all, most people don’t know Islam is inherently supremacist. So if I say something critical of “Islam,” some people will immediately stop listening because I am clearly a bigoted Islamophobe, or they think I must be ignorant if I’m implying “all Muslims are terrorists.”
The use of the term “Islamic supremacists” when talking about Muslims waging jihad against non-Muslims, prevents this reaction and allows the uninitiated to listen.
Most people believe Islam has been “hijacked” by a small percentage of extremists, and they think that’s who I’m talking about when I say “Islamic supremacists,” so they’re comfortable and can listen to the information.
Hopefully, they will eventually learn that Islam has not been hijacked and that the “fundamentalists” are following basic, mainstream Islamic teachings, and that Islam is political at its core. They will hopefully learn Islam not only encourages intolerance and violence against “unbelievers,” but commands all Muslims to show their devotion to Allah by fighting for Islamic domination over all other governments and nations.
But in the meantime, by using this term, we can begin the education process.
Another reason to use the term “Islamic supremacism” is to avoid arousing the ire of those who call themselves “Muslim” but reject the political nature of Islamic teachings.
If you are one of the people who don’t know about the supremacist nature of Islam, I encourage you to read the Qur’an for yourself. Some people will say Islam is a religion of peace. Others will say the teachings mandate continual warfare against anyone who resists the domination of Islam. If you haven’t read the Qur’an, how can you determine who is correct?
You might think maybe they’re both correct. Maybe the Qur’an is written in parables and vague, mystical language; maybe it it full of contradictions, and people can pick and choose passages to justify anything they want.
I have read the Qur’an and I can tell you it is no such thing. It is written in clear and forceful language by a single man. There are contradictions in the Qur’an, but the Qur’an itself tells the reader how to deal with the contradictions (the peaceful, tolerant passages have been abrogated, that is, they’ve been canceled and replaced by intolerant, violent passages).
Should you believe me? No, you shouldn’t. You should read the Qur’an yourself. It isn’t that hard to do. Then you will know for sure.
Why would the creator of mankind wish to kill all those who do not submit to his commands? Because:
Q 2:163 SHAKIR
And your Allah is one Allah! there is no god but He; He is the Beneficent, the Merciful.
All Muslims accept the above Quranic verses as the word of Allah or they are not Muslims. It is clear that it is exclusive, it is indisputable, and it is supremacist and thus it s fascist. To reinforce this conviction these are also commands of Allah:
Quran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them” No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle. The targets of violence are “those who disbelieve” – further defined in the next verse (13) as “defy and disobey Allah.” Nothing is said about self-defense. In fact, the verses in sura 8 were narrated shortly after a battle provoked by Muhammad, who had been trying to attack a lightly-armed caravan to steal goods belonging to other people.
Quran (8:15) – “O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey’s end.”
Quran (8:39) – “And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion is all for Allah”
Some translations interpret “fitna” as “persecution”, but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there – just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad’s intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until “religion is only for Allah”, meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that “Allah must have no rivals.”
Thus all Muslims who believe in the Quran are exclusive fascists and will never change or moderate so long as their Holy Text is their guide.
If Allah is:
He is the Beneficent, the Merciful. [But He is Not.]
Why would he then be so merciless and cruel as to advocate the striking of the head and tips of fingers of non-believers?
The above appears like Allah is the image of a Conquerer Warriorout to subdue and punish any opposition in the world rather than a Beneficent and Merciful god. Would Allah have written the Quran to portray himself as a harsh merciless conquerer warrior rather than a merciful and beneficent god? Hence the only conclusion is that the Quran was written by man and not by Allah. Allah was conjured out of the mythology of more ancient religions and customs. Certainly, if Allah was indeed so cruel as to want to kill and subdue the rest of the world and put it under his domination, he cannot be a god anyone would want to worship.
In this introspection we separate truth from fiction and use modern science and modern logic to understand faiths based on mythology to ascertain if it is truth or fiction. Questions should be asked,
11,774 Terror Attacks Worldwide in 2015; 28,328 Deaths Due to Terror Attacks
New Zealand Massacre of 49 Muslims
The world is horrified with this mass killing of 49 Muslims while praying in their mosques. But has this been a freak incident or an event waiting to happen? Has Brenton Tarrant, 28 years old, the accused killer a misguided lunatic or is he an intelligent martyr for the civilised world? Brenton Tarrant appears to be knowledgeable about the fascist dogma of Islam and their desire to dominate the world with Islam and that is why he saw the influx of Muslims into his world as an invasion into his world and decided that these Muslims were his deadly enemies. It is only with such a conviction that Brenton Tarrant would have such hatred stirred in him to allow him to commit such an atrocity. He felt he was justified because the rest of the world were ignorant of Islam and have tolerated this invasion in ignorance of the aims of Islam, i.e., world domination.
Yes, most of the world are totally ignorant of the ideology expressed in the Quran and believed by mUslims to be the literal word of Allah. The is clearly illustrated by the reaction of Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand who said:
“My thoughts are with the family of Afghan origin who’ve been shot and killed at this heinous incident.”
Jacinda Ardern, dressed with a Muslim headscarf uttered the above words on television. How disgustingly ignorant it make anyone want to puik. She has not idea of the doctrine of Islam which states that:
“There is not god to be worshipped but Allah.” THIS IS ISLAM’S SUPREMACIST STANCE ON GOD. INFIDELS ARE WORTHY OF DEATH.
Does Jacinda Ardern then also accept the Islamic doctrines and teachings since she has accept Muslim as one of them? It shows her lack of knowledge of Islam and their doctrines. She in in the wrong job.
Has Brenton Tarrant sacrificed his life to show the way to salvation of the Western civilisation?