It is not for any prophet to have captives [slaves] until he hath made slaughter in the land.

—
Koran 8:67

“Islam was never a religion of peace. Islam is the religion of fighting. No-one should believe that
the war that we are waging is the war of the Islamic State. It is the war of all Muslims, but the
Islamic State is spearheading it. It is the war of Muslims against infidels”. — Abu Bakr al-
Baghdadi, Leader of the Islamic State, Newsweek, May 2015

“Pope says Koran is a book of peace and Islam is a peaceful religion”— Daily Mail, August
2016 “ISIS jihadis blast Pope Francis and claim their war is sanctioned by Allah in the Koran”—
Daily Express, August 2016

“Waging jihad – spreading the rule of Allah by the sword – is an obligation found in the
Quran, the word of our Lord.”—“Why We Hate You”, Dabiq (official statement of the Islamic
State) Issue 15, August 2016

“On the IRA we told the truth, on the Islamic problem, we lie.” George Walden, UK
Government Minister for Higher Education (1985–1987)

About the Authors

Tommy Robinson has been campaigning against Islamic extremism since 2004. In 2009 a small
protest group he set up in his home town in England became a national protest group: the English
Defence League. After being hounded by the State for organizing this protest group, Tommy
Robinson was imprisoned in 2013. In 2015 his best-selling autobiography Tommy Robinson:
Enemy of the State was published by The Press News Ltd (ISBN 0957096496). Despite the police
being given hundreds of documented death threats made against Tommy Robinson (and his entire
family) police have not even prosecuted a single individual. Under laws which oblige the British
police to warn potential victims of credible plots to kill them, police have been compelled to inform
Tommy Robinson of six known plots to kill him. No-one has been prosecuted for any of these plots.
In addition, Muslim terrorist groups such as Al Shabab have also threatened to kill Mr. Robinson.
On a regular basis the British police continue to hound Mr. Robinson and even his small children.

Peter McLoughlin is a writer who lives in England. Brought up in a Communist household, he

considered himself a Leftist Libertarian until mugged by reality in 2009. Whilst researching
evidence that schoolgirls were systematically entrapped into prostitution by Muslim gangs in
England, McLoughlin uncovered that the State had known of this grooming phenomenon for
decades, but the agencies and the news media had concealed their knowledge of the phenomenon.
After 20 years of cover-up the grooming scandal was broken open by The Times in 2011, following
two years of protests across England by the English Defence League. In 2014 McLoughlin
published the first book on the nation-wide cover-up, months before “Rotherham” became a byword
for taxpayer-funded agencies turning a blind-eye to the rape of schoolgirls on an industrial scale. In
2016 an updated edition of his book Easy Meat: Inside Britain’s Grooming Gang Scandal was
published by New English Review Press (ISBN 1943003068).
Preface

Throughout this text phrases and paragraphs are emphasised using bold text. None of this emphasis
should be assumed to occur in the original texts from which we quote. We render these parts of the
book in bold text because this book attempts to undo decades of deception from politicians,
religious clerics and journalists. The use of bold text is to enable the reader to quickly and easily
grasp the core content of this book, whilst the rest of the text is there to supplement the core
content.

A frequent ruse used to confuse people coming to terms with the Koran is “what you have heard has
been taken out of context”. To destroy this ruse, this book contains an entire Koran, with the only
significant difference being that this Koran has been put into the accepted chronological order (but
in reverse, so that the latest – and most violent – commands spoken by Mohammed are the first
thing the reader sees). As we explain in the Introduction, it is the normal Koran, the standard Koran
which “takes things out of context”, in that the standard Koran is in no rational order, thus denying
the reader of the context provided by the chronology of what was said first and what was said last.
Our presentation of the Koran is the only known attempt to present the Koran in reverse
chronological order. Furthermore it is also the only known attempt to visually indicate which parts
of the Koran are known to have been cancelled by Mohammedʼs later commands. Because of these
features, our Koran allows the non-Muslim reader to grasp in minutes what might otherwise takes
months or years of study. The reasons why Muslims kill for Islam will become readily apparent, and
the reader will easily be able to convince family, friends and colleagues that these are the reasons.
The Introduction proves that this view of Islam was the standard view among Western experts for
centuries before Muslim terrorists brought down the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001.
The reader need no longer be fobbed-off with lies such as “Islam is a religion of peace”, or “Islam is
opposed to all killing”, or “Muslims only fight in self-defence”. With the expertise gained from this
book, the electorate can start to demand political change, before it is too late.

We would like to thank the following for their assistance in providing inter alia advice, reference
material, organisational guidance, proof-reading: Alex Felix, Andrew Bostom, Brian John Thomas,
Gavin Boby, Kay, Paul Collins, Robert Bor. Any defects which remain in this work are the
responsibility of the authors. This book was originally conceived as a print book using traditional
academic practices, however Kindle will not permit such standards as paragraph indents on both
sides. Sadly, this deficiency in the Kindle format means that extended quotations are only indented
on the left.
Introduction

Following any horrendous terrorist attack by Muslims, an attack explicitly done in the name of
Islam, we are immediately reassured by politicians, academics and clergy that Islam is “a religion of
peace”. If you are impatient to try and understand this contradictory situation, a situation in which
most of us have found ourselves on a monthly or even weekly basis for many years, just read to the
end of this paragraph and then turn to the Koran which follows the Introduction and you will
immediately see why Islam is the very opposite of a religion of peace. You will see why Muslims
kill, and you will see that those members of our own society who have a duty to inform us have
been blatantly lying to us about Islam. The lies by those who we trust have had the populations of
democracies confused for so many years. If you do not believe what you see after just a few
minutes of reading the Koran contained in this book, then return to our Introduction for further
evidence and explanation. If you are a Muslim, please put this book down. We do not wish you
to become a killer because this book leads you to understand the doctrines and history of
Islam more thoroughly. ⧉

Since the fall of the Twin Towers, a narrative has been pushed claiming that Islam is a religion of
peace. But the truth is the opposite: Islam is a religion of war. Moreover, this truth about Islam was
known by the educated class for centuries, right up until the end of the twentieth century. But just a
decade after 9/11, the unimaginable became fact: the police in Britain would arrest those who dared
to quote the views on Islam of such great historical figures as Winston Churchill. When the truth
about the violence inherent in Islam is occasionally heard, the Left are to be found denouncing the
speaker as “racist”,“Islamophobic” or “far-right” - those who tell the truth being demeaned as
holding uninformed and prejudiced views. Such denunciations are nonsense, as anyone looking at
only the core texts of Islam will see that Islam is a religion of war. When a Muslim would explicitly
articulate the Islam recognized by the companions of Mohammed, the Islam practised for over a
thousand years, that Muslim would often be marginalized by our elite as “an Islamist extremist”.
This is an example of another deceit used to confuse the public, to claim that there is something
called “Islamism” which is separate from Islam, and that there is even a violent version of Islamism.
But there are no shades of gray in Islam. From the image of Mohammed portrayed by the core texts
of Islam, it is clear that if Mohammed was alive today we would be unable to distinguish between
the founder of Islam and a so-called ʻviolent Islamistʼ. The truth about Islam is black and white, and
has been known for centuries, as we shall demonstrate.

Whilst your child is being deceived at school, the adult population in the West is deceived by the
lies of politicians (lies supported by their allies in the media). Meanwhile, in homes and madrassas,
in mosques and Islamic organisations, Muslims in the West are told the truth about Islam. One of
the first things that Barack Obama did on becoming President of the United States was to visit the
world’s foremost Islamic university, to tell the world that in the Middle Ages, when Spain was ruled
by Muslim invaders, it was a place of peace and tolerance.

Obama hit many of the right notes. He conveyed to his audience that he is familiar with the vast and
glorious history of Islam, such as the long periods of religious tolerance in Andalusia, where
Muslims, Jews, and Christians lived together in peace under Islamic rule.1

The above quotation is taken from an article in the “Religion and Ethics Newsweekly” of the PBS
website (PBS is the American equivalent of the BBC). The article cites numerous professors of
Islam (some Muslim, some non-Muslim). If those experts have any criticism of Obama’s speech, it
is that he was not positive enough about the greatness of Islam. However, this idea that there was
peace and religious tolerance under Islam is a lie. The lie is so gross that those politicians who put it
forward might as well say that there was peace and tolerance in Nazi Germany. This lie about
Islamic tolerance is easily exposed based solely on Islamic scholarship from that period (although in
recent years entire books have been published exposing this lie about the myth of Islamic
tolerance).2 Obamaʼs speech concluded by quoting portions from the Talmud and the New
Testament that promote peace. The word “peace” appears twenty-eight times in this speech, yet the
verse from the Koran with which Obama concludes has nothing to do with the promotion of peace.3
Thus, in his key speech purporting that Islam was peaceful and tolerant the President of the United
States (who says he comes from a long-line of Muslims and that he grew up in Muslim Indonesia),
could not cite a single verse from the Koran which promotes peace.4 Yet no journalist or academic
thought to point out this discrepancy.

To expose this discrepancy further let us turn to a famous commentary on the Koran by Imam
Qurtubi, a scholar who lived in this supposedly tolerant Islamized Spain over 700 years ago. In
2003 British convert to Islam Aisha Bewley translated the Imamʼs Classical Commentary of the
Holy Qur’an.5 Ms. Bewley is far from being some ignorant extremist when it comes to Islam, and
in the small print of her translation it says that her husband Sheikh Bewley was the editor of the
commentary. Between them these two converts to Islam have published dozens of books on Islam,
including such books as Islam: The Empowering of Women (1999) and Islam: Basic Practices and
Beliefs (2008). We can take it for granted that not only are the Bewleys considered to be very
mainstream and respectable Muslims but also that they are highly knowledgeable about Islam. They
have even published their own translation of the Koran.6

Ms. Bewley says that her translation of Qurtubi’s commentary “is intended to give modern readers
access to the immense learning of Imam al-Qurtubi in such a way that it will illuminate for them the
meaning of Allah’s words in the Qur’an”.7 Yet this learned, illuminating commentary on the Koran
portrays Islam as anything but tolerant. When it comes to discussing the key violent sections of the
Koran, this classical commentary makes it clear not only that “the religion of peace” commands
violence, but this violence is to be used against those who are doing absolutely nothing to harm
Muslims:

permission to fight was revealed about fighting in general and the instruction is to fight not only
those idolaters who fight the Muslims but also those who do not fight. […] This is the position of
the majority of scholars.8

This Islamic scholar goes on to clarify: Islam demands that all peaceful non-Muslims are to be
killed purely because we have not submitted to the values of Islam.

It is an unqualified command to fight without any precondition of hostilities being initiated by the
unbelievers [...] the reason for fighting is disbelief because Allah says, “until there is no more fitna,”
meaning disbelief in this case. So the goal is to abolish disbelief and that is clear.9

We can forget the lie that Muslims are only acting in response to aggression. Is it any surprise that
the world is plagued by Islamic terrorism, when these classical scholarly interpretations of Islam
make it clear that the Koran instructs Muslims to kill unbelievers “without any precondition of
hostilities being initiated by the unbelievers”? In the aftermath of devout Muslims slaughtering
innocent people in the name of Islam, it is a lie of the greatest magnitude when leaders in the West
describe Islam as “a religion of peace”. As we will show, for at least 150 years before 9/11, the
educated elite in the West were in no doubt that Islam was a religion of war.

Following repeated terrorist attacks by Muslims in the West it is not uncommon for Sheikh Bewley
to publish a statement denouncing the actions of these Muslim terrorists.10 In these denunciations it
would be helpful if Sheikh Bewley explained why the actions of the Muslim terrorists are
supposedly at odds with the Koranic commands to kill, commands such as those found in his wifeʼs
translation of the commentary from Qurtubi. Experts inform us that Qurtubi’s commentary is
among the greatest sources of inspiration for Muslim terrorists.11 Are these modern, moderate,
educated Muslims who translate such works oblivious to any connection between the texts they
cherish and the violence performed in the name of those texts?President Obama could praise as
“tolerant” the society which produced a scholar like Qurtubi, yet the liberal journalists who reported
on Obamaʼs speech (and the academic experts on Islam quoted by these journalists) had nothing
even remotely critical to say about the texts or the doctrines from that society, doctrines which
incite genocide.12 What is going on?

The explanation is that Islam is completely unlike our normal expectations of a religion. Contrary to
religions like Buddhism and Christianity, Islam sanctifies violence against unbelievers: the only
reward guaranteed to Muslims is they will get to spend an eternity in Paradise provided they die
fighting to impose Islam on others. Not only do those who die during jihad go to Paradise, they
have the most honorific position in Paradise, and have the power to help get members of their
family into Paradise.13 Those Muslims who do not die in this way face the prospect of an eternity
of torment in Hell. The body of scripture underlying Islam is very explicit in the violence
perpetrated by Mohammed and his followers. The violence was aimed at conquest and such
violence was committed even when the opponents of Islam were pluralist and offered no resistance.
Islam is expansionist, instructing its followers to wage jihad on non-Muslims for all time (as
Qurtubi says, the commands to kill are “general” and “unqualified”). The Islamic State we now see
in Syria and Iraq is a new incarnation of the previous Islamic State, a state which only ceased to
exist in 1924 (after enduring from the twentieth century all the way back to the seventh-century
Arabia). Seeing Islam as a religion is less accurate than viewing it as an ideology committed to
installing the most totalitarian regime imaginable. Compared to the centuries-old threat from Islam,
the threat from National Socialism was over in the blink of an eye. Islam encompasses religion,
politics, etiquette, morality, legality and even the conduct of war. Islam is so all-encompassing that
truth itself is subservient to the total system.14

As the Koran contained in this book makes abundantly clear, the world-view of Muslims is based
on a world that is divided in two parts: the world of peace (Dar al-Islam) where Islam reigns, and
the world of war (Dar al-Harb), the lands of the people who have not submitted to rule by Islam.
The process of converting Dar al-Harb to Dar al-Islam is called jihad. If we turn to mainstream
scholarly works from the 1980s we see that this is made emphatically clear: the entry on Jihad in a
thirteen volume encyclopaedia about the Middle Ages says that the world of war “must be brought
under the rule of Islam by ceaseless jihad”.15 It is thus a holy duty for every Muslim to assist in
increasing the area controlled by Islam, whether by preaching or by violence. As you will see for
yourself in our Koran, the division into those two oppositions — peace and war, believer and
unbeliever — permeates the book. But you are not to be allowed to know that these are the
fundamental principles of Islam, you are to be deceived by schools and the media into believing that
Islam is “a religion of peace” and that throughout history Muslims have been tolerant people.
It is only when the Koran has been arranged chronologically that the non-Muslim can see that Islam
is constructed to bring the non-Muslim to kneel before Muslims and Islam. The book you have
before you is the most overt attempt to display the chronological structure of the Koran and to prove
that the Koran commands war and subjugation instead of peace and tolerance. After so much
deception by the elite, we hope that this book brings the problem with Islam into clear focus.

Buy the book at Amazon.co.uk