Angels Fight For Muhammad?

    Muhammad and Islam became a recognized force after the Battle of Badr. According to the Quran, Muhammad told his men that three thousand angels had been fighting at that battle with them. Really? What did they use, their harps? Since angels are supernatural, why were there 3,000? Wouldn't one do? If God wanted Muhammad to win the Battle of Badr, why didn't he just will it and it would be done? What were Muhammad's men to do? Be honest and say, "Boss, we didn't see any angels."? If you say that the angels was a figure of speech, then you slide into saying everything in the Quran could be a figure of speech as there is no evidence for any of it, just like the Jewish and Christian bibles. They, as well as the other religions, are all the word of men saying they have seen and talked to God or his representative. They can't all be right, can they? Can you handle the idea that they may all be wrong? That they either sincerely thought it was happening or deliberately made it up?
    There was a time in my life when I slept with my Bible placed on the other side of my bed where my wife used to sleep. It wasn't that I believed the Bible was true or correct but because so many people had read it in the pursuit of truth and goodness and because so many people had died for simply reading and believing in it. Of course, people seeking to have the power of violence over other people used the Bible - they will use whatever works!- to justify their torture and killing of many people. Will the Kharajites allow you to use the Quran for goodness and reflection or is it just control and hate with them? Are you really planning to put yourself into a situation where you could be killed for not believing 3,000 angels fought alongside Muhammad's men at the Battle of Badr? That would be absurdity piled on top of absurdity! Think, man! Think, woman!
Peter Nickerson, Philosophy Major, Class of '68, William and Mary
"The measure of a man,
  Is not what he says,
  But what he does,
  And what he allows others,
  To do in his presence."
   - Navy Seal Instructor

Criminal vs Jerk

    During an interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News, Wallace informed Hillary that none of the things she had told America ( We, the people) was true according to what FBI Director, Comey, said in his legendary press release in which he laid out how Hillary was a criminal, but wasn't going to charge her. Hillary said to Wallace: "Director Comey said that all my answers were truthful."
This was either a blatant lie or Hillary is delusional or she is such a pathological liar that she believes her lies are true and is thus delusional.
    Hillary denied to us receiving or sending classified email. Comey said not true. Hillary said to us that there was nothing marked classified emailed. Comey said not true. Hillary said to us she had returned all her work-related emails. Comey said not true, thousands were not returned.
    Hillary is bringing up the fitness of the Jerk to serve as president. She has a good point, but the question is two-edged. What about her fitness? There's no question that she's a pathological liar, but is there more? Does she believe her lies and is therefore delusional? It appears to me that Hillary does know when she lying because I watched her face as she tells her lies, and she gets a characteristic "Little Miss Innocent" look. Her eyes get bigger and her eyebrows go up. I am sure she is working hard with her consultants to do away with this tell, but if she's able to do that people will wonder if she's come to believe her copious lies and is now delusional. Then we will have a delusional Criminal vs a Jerk for president of the United States. Isn't the Hippity Hop culture wonderful? This information was taken from "Clinton Short-Circuits the Truth" from the Wall Street Journal, August 8, 2016.
Peter Nickerson, Philosophy Major, Class of '68, William and Mary.
"The measure of a man,
  Is not what he says,
  But what he does,
  And what he allows others,
  To do in his presence.
   -Navy Seal Instructor

Defanging Islam ll

   The Mutazia were condemned as philosophers who were corrupting Islam with the Greek heritage. They were hunted down and killed being labeled infidels and atheists. The end of the Mutazia appeared to come as the imams tried to consolidate their power and "sharia" lost its reflective dimensions and emphasized the laws of the immams to reorient Muslims to the power and control of the leader instead of the "ummah", the people. The Mutazia had been very democratic insisting that the imman be established by free votes. Naturally, the immans in power wanted to remain that way, and "sharia" was modified to give them tyrannical power.
    However, the ninth century belonged to the democratic and rational Mutazias, and this was the century of freedom which meant that people were let alone to make their choices. Great men made great inventions, such as algebra and trigonometry. Reason, openness, democracy, thinking, freedom, honesty, and any other human virtue was prohibited as the Iron Curtain fell on the Mutazia Renaissance. Sharia demanded that Islam become a religion for compliant simpletons, if you toed the present party line which of course was "divinely ordained" and everything else too. The Iranian Shahrastani in his twelfth century book, Revealed Religions and Fabricated Beliefs put it succintly: "A Muslim is he who believes and obeys. Religion is obedience. An obeying Muslim is religious. He gives who gives priority to his own opinions is a modernizing innovator and a creator." Horrors! The Renaissance was over. During the ninth century, Islam had defanged itself and flourished. But people desperate for the power of violence over others could not leave a peaceful Islam alone.
    Peter Nickerson, Philosophy Major, Class of '68, William and Mary.
"The measure of a man
  Is not what he says,
  But what he does,
  And what he allows,
  Others to do in his presence."
   - Navy Seal Instructor

Defanging Islam

    Having declared the humble objective of defanging Muslim of its violence, I was relieved to find that there have been non-violent sects in Islam with the best know being the Mutazila. Not only that, the Mutazila were the dominant sect in the ninth century according to the book I am using for this discussion, Islam And Democracy: Fear Of The Modern World (1992 by Fatema Mernissi. Some know her as the psychiatrist of Islam. Unfortunately, her therapy hasn't worked. In fact, since 1992 the patient seems to have become much worse. Some parts of the patient are now floridly psychotic! They have not only taken over the hospital, but established their own country or caliphate, aided by a friendly doctor, Dr. Barrack Obama, who took the hospital staff- American troops- out of the lunatic asylum and assured us that the ones acting out in the loony bin were just "junior varsity."
    The Mutazia wanted reason- "aaql"- and personal opinion- "ray'-back into the political process which in the Muslim world means not just the political system but everywhere in the culture since the political system or Islam is totalitarian.
As Stalin said of this totalitarian state, "Everything belongs to the State." so Sharia Islam insists that "Everything belongs to Sharia."
    However, the establishment or the power structure went after the Mutazia in an organized way, much like the Criminal going after the Stupid Jerk in America's presidential campaign. The Mutazia were condemned as philosophers-
"falasifa" who were corrupting Islam with

Reply To Mr. Khan

    Mr. Khan, First I am sorry for the death of your son. As a father with one natural child, a son, I think I have some appreciation for the depth of your loss.
    Secondly, I'd like to address your hypocrisy in brandishing the Constitution while you attacked Mr. Trump for his position that Muslims not be allowed into this country. I share his postion if the Muslims are Sharia. I am not interested in America being destroyed by Sharia terrorists, and you shouldn't be either. Your hypocrisy lies in the fact that the Constitution does not grant Muslims or anyone else free admission into America. There are immigration laws that are constitutional. You are a trained lawyer and know that. Hence your hypocrisy. You are also insincere asking what sacrifices Mr. Trump has made for America for at least two reasons. First, you did not willingly make the sacrifice of loosing your son, and I guarantee that if you had a choice, you would not have told God
"Go ahead and have him killed today. I'm willing to make that sacrifice." You had to make it; you did not voluntarily make it and wouldn't have. So don't go around demanding that others make sacrifices "like" you because you wouldn't have made it willingly. Second, you are deceiving people in your demand for sacrifices as if that was an American expectation. America is the land of the free and the brave. It is not the land of sacrificial human beings to whatever government employees demand. America is the land of the pursuit of individual happiness. It is not a slaughterhouse for the government employees.
    I think you crassly manipulated the heroism and tragedy of your son's death to support Crooked Hillary at her nomination convention. Again you were insincere and conniving because you didn't wave your little Constitution at her as well as at the Stupid Jerk Donald Trump and ask her what sacrifices that pathological liar and millionaire had made for her country. Would you really support a pathological liar over a stupid jerk? As a lawyer and an officer of the court, you should have been ashamed to be seen at Hillary Clinton's nominating convention!
    Peter Nickerson, Philosophy Major, Class of '68, William and Mary College
    The measure of a man,
    Is not what he says,
    But what he does,
    And what he allows others,
    To do in his presence.
     - Navy Seal Instructor

Tribe Israel 1212 B.C.E. Part ll

    The Arab Conquest or Crusade did not take place until 638 C.E. This means that the Jews were in the Levant for at least eighteen and a half centuries before the Arabs. So who are the aliens now? Like the Phoenicians of Lebanon, the Jewish people have been conquered many times, but they have persevered as a race in the Levant for thirty centuries. The Arabs and their religion, Islam, have only been there less than fourteen centuries. They also used bloody Crusades to seize their land from the Christians and Jews. This land became part of the Arab's imperialist empire from 638 to 1099 C.E. However, during that time, there was no such thing as an independent Arab nation by the name of Palestine or any other name. Furthermore, when there were nations where Israel is now, and there were two such nations, they were Jewish nations, not Muslim, not Christian even.
    As is logically evident and reasonably recognized by anyone of good faith, it is the Arabs who are the Johnnys-come-lately, and a nation by the name of Palestine has never existed. There is no language from Palestine nor is there a Palestinian culture. The language is Arabic, and the culture is Arabic. In other words, "Palestine" is the emperor with no clothes. There is no Palestine, but the Arabs are trying to put clothes on a non-entity. All an honest person has to say is "There is no Palestine except as a concept, and hence no language or culture.
The same can hardly be said of Israel, at least truthfully. People can say anything. So what? This information comes from Because They Hate by Brigitte Gabriel. As I googled parts of it, it appears to be true.
    Peter Nickerson, Philosophy Major, Class of '68, College of William and Mary
    The measure of a man
    Is not what he says,
    But what he does,
    And what he allows others.
    To do in his presence.
     - Navy Seal Instructor

Tribe Israel 1212 BCE

    If you listened to the Arabs, the Palestinians, and Muslims in general, you would think that Israel was an outsider, "the stranger," to the the Middle East, put there by the American and the Europeans during World War ll. This is religious disinformation accorded by the Koran to anything that is the for the "good" of Islam. It is known in the Koran as "taqiyya" and is a constant part of the Koran as well as Muslim politics and behavior. But it is not the truth no matter who says it and how many times it's said. According to Egyptian hieroglyphics carved in stone, the tribes of Israel were established in Canaan, ancient Palestine, as early as 1212 B.C.E. Archaeological diggings showed that there was a proto-Israel in the Jewish presence of South Palestine and present-day Israel as early as 925 B.C.E. If I am doing my math correctly, the Arabs weren't even in Levant then but began massing on the southern border in 632 C.E. preparing for the Arab Conquest of 638 C.E. The ancient records of the Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Roman, the Byzantine, and the Muslim Empires all attest to the Jewish presence then.
To Be Continued
    Peter Nickerson, Philosophy Major, Class of '68, William and Mary College