Wednesday, August 11, 2010

The Ridiculous Smear That Rand Paul Kidnapped A Woman and Forced Her To Take Bong Hits


GQ writer also claims Paul was in a “secret” society at Baylor University, despite inserting a photo of the “secret” society [from their newspaper The Rope] in his story

by Larry Simons
August 10, 2010

It seems it did not take long for establishment-embracing, Constitution-hating liberals to begin their smear campaigns on Kentucky Senate hopeful Rand Paul just in time to attempt to divert voters away from candidates [like Paul] who go against the status quo and advocate true Constitutional liberty.

In a recent article by GQ writer Jason Zengerle, Paul is accused of behavior [while he attended Baylor University between 1981 and 1984] that [if true] would completely contradict the principles and political stances Paul holds to be true.

After Zengerle admits that Paul and his campaign team have never lied about the fact that Paul did not graduate from Baylor, Zengerle goes into attack mode, claiming that Paul “wasn’t your typical Baylor student”. Zengerle says that Paul was a member of a secret society called the NoZe Brotherhood.

Zengerle compares the NoZe Brotherhood to Yale’s Skull and Bones, despite the fact that Skull and Bones is truly a secret society in the fact that no one is allowed to even discuss being involved in it. Both 2004 Presidential candidates [and cousins] George W. Bush and John Kerry, who are Bonesmen, were asked on separate occasions by Meet the Press host Tim Russert about their membership in Skull and Bones. Both replied that they could not talk about it. Skull and Bones also embraces satanic imagery and rituals and is designed to be an institutionalized meeting place for those who seek superiority and power.

Zengerle admits that the NoZe Brotherhood is nothing more than a club that “existed to torment the Baylor administration, which it accomplished through pranks and its satirical newspaper The Rope”. Hardly a club that was designed to promote superiority and power. In fact, if the club existed to “torment” the Baylor administration, then one could translate that as “going against the establishment”, which is exactly what Rand Paul is to this day, an anti-establishment politician. Where’s the contradiction and controversy?

Inserted in Zengerle’s article is a photo [below] of the NoZe Brotherhood that was apparently taken from the clubs’ newspaper The Rope. How many secret societies publish newspapers? How many secret societies insert photographs of their “secret” club in those newspapers? That’s a shitty way to keep your club secret, isn’t it? Yoo hoo…here we are! All seven of us for all to see!


The "secret" society BoZe Brotherhood showing themselves for all to see

Zengerle then completely contradicts himself by saying, “In 1978, the Baylor administration became so fed up with the NoZe that it suspended the group from campus for being, in the words of Baylor's president at the time, "lewd, crude, and grossly sacrilegious." During Paul's three years at Baylor, according to former NoZe Brothers, if the administration discovered a student was a member of the NoZe, the punishment was automatic expulsion.” Right underneath this paragraph in his article, Zengerle inserts the photo of the NoZe from 1983 [with Paul in the photo].

If the Baylor administration automatically expelled NoZe members, why would the group plaster their photo right inside their newspaper? Better question: Why, after the administration saw the NoZe’s picture [and they had to see it] in their paper, did they not expel all seven people in the picture immediately? Hmmmmm.

The answer to this question might be best answered by someone who posted a comment under Zengerle’s story.

“Pfw51” said this:

“…to label the Noze Brotherhood as some malicious "secret society" is so absurd I fully understand why Paul would choose to ignore your attempt to smear him. Every one of us knew the Noze and who was in it... they were pranksters who put out a silly newspaper and sneaked their float into the homecoming parade, and if GQ had wanted to find this out it would have been very easy to do so. Your story is a smear, pure and simple, and I lost a lot of respect for you today.”

So, according to “Pfw51”, the NoZe Brotherhood is nothing more than a more intellectual version of the Delta house clan in the film Animal House. Would Zengerle call Bluto, Otter, Boon, Pinto, Flounder, D-Day, Hoover and Stork a secret society? Apparently so.

Another comment by “Clayboy73” says:

“I am a Baylor alum. Give me a break! A secret society? The NoZe Brotherhood? LMAO!!! It was just a group of pranksters...good guys, just silly. They act as if they were the Masons. The assault on the Tea Party continues.”

“Pfw51” also commented on Zengerle’s other accusation of Rand Paul: that in 1983, Paul and another NoZe brother paid a visit to a female member of Paul’s swim team, came to her house, knocked on the door, blindfolded her, tied her up, put her in their car, took her to their apartment and forced her to take bong hits and to worship an Aqua Buddha. “Pfw51” said:

“As a Baylor alumni who graduated a few years ahead of Rand Paul, I can tell you with absolute certainty that if this act happened at Baylor 27 years ago as the story claimed, the Baylor administration would have acted quickly and harshly and Paul, as an athlete representing Baylor, would have been out on his butt the next day. Baylor is a relatively small Baptist university and things like that don't happen in a vacuum. If this had happened, everybody from the students to the media would have known about it immediately.”

Zengerle says that the woman “requested anonymity because of her current job as a clinical psychologist”. But yet she spoke with a reporter for GQ about it? Why would this woman think that revealing this information and going public with it would hurt her job? Better questions:

*Why didn’t this woman report this incident 27 years ago?
*What evidence does GQ have except this woman's testimony that this incident really happened?
*Why did she not go to MSNBC, FOX News, ABC, CBS, NBC or CNN about it?
*Why would GQ care about protecting the woman's anonymity?
*She comes out of nowhere 27 years after the incident and picks GQ magazine to tell this story to?

Near the end of his article, Zengerle says that the woman said of the incident, “They never hurt me, they never did anything wrong, but the whole thing was kind of sadistic. They were messing with my mind. It was some kind of joke.”

They never did anything wrong? Being kidnapped, tied up and being taken from your home is perfectly OK? Hmmmm. It’s crystal clear that this mystery woman, whoever she is, was doing damage control when she claimed that they “did nothing wrong”, because she knows the very first question that any sane, rational person would ask in their first breath about the incident is, “Why didn’t you go to the police when it happened?” Because, according to her, they “did nothing wrong”, that’s why. Now the question of “why didn’t you report them?” can be laid to rest.

Under the comments for the article, “Turbolover” says:

“WOW! what a lame article. It's quite clear the author of this article has some beef with rand and ron paul. What kind of women admits to getting tied up, blind folded and shoved in the back of a car and thinks that it was some kind of joke and there was nothing wrong with it. and this lady is a clinical psychologist! LAAAAAAAAAAMME GQ!”

The bottom line is, the incident never happened. This is why the woman’s anonymity is being protected and why she claims Paul and his friend “did nothing wrong”. This is a classic example of a savage, blatant smear. A claim is made with zero evidence to back it up, the general public hears about it and bingo, it must be true. Why would anyone make up a story like this, right? Questions like, “Who is the woman?”and “Why didn’t she go to police?” are unimportant and completely ignored.

GQ editor-in-chief Jim Nelson claims that his magazine “vetted, researched, and exhaustively fact-checked it”. Then he claimed that he gave Rand Paul and his team a chance to refute the accusations before the article was printed and they did not. I am quite sure that all the GQ people did was call Paul’s office and did not disclose they were GQ. I bet they asked, “Can we speak to Mr. Paul?” and after hearing, “Mr. Paul is not in right now, can I take a message?”, they ran their story.

Since Monday, Rand Paul has threatened to sue GQ for libel and has denied the accusations. Isn’t it funny how the pro-establishment can swarm by Obama’s side when people accuse him of not being a natural born citizen, and when Obama doesn’t deny it, but simply ignores it, they say, “Because it’s not even worth entertaining”. When Constitution-embracing, pro-liberty politicians ignore accusations, they “must be guilty” because they “ignore it”.

I wonder what the liberals would say if Rand Paul was able to seal his records by executive order like Obama has already done?

Hmmmmm.

9 comments:

the_last_name_left said...

You're a good writer, Larry. Sadly your skill in that field far exceeds your political sense.

What *is* True Constitutional Liberty, Larry?

Larry said...

Wow coming from you I feel completely humiliated and put in my place....NOT. You know what kills me about you? You've critiqued my articles constantly but you never actually REFUTE anything. If I have to explain what constitutional liberty is, then its not worth explaining because you wouldn't grasp it anyway.

Larry said...

My writing skills far exceed my political sense so you say....yet you can never ever refute my political sense, can you? Ad hominem attacks are NOT refutations.

the_last_name_left said...

People throw words like "liberty" around. Anyone can say they want Liberty - it's easy. Who wouldn't say they want it?

What is it though? What do people mean? How do they mean to achieve it?

Your liberty doesn't include economic liberty - not economic democracy. You stand for protection of private property rights, which are exclusive. And inheritable. That's a very pro-elite position, and represents liberty only for those fortunate enough to possess property - those that don't possess property don't gain any liberty from it, quite the opposite.

On your political sense - you used to link to the fascist Willis Carto. Now you don't. Pardon me for imagining I had something to do with that.....

Larry said...

Funny, you claim I have no political sense" yet the ONLY thing you addressed from my entire article was me saying Paul stood for true Constitutional liberty, and IGNORED the rest. What's the matter? Couldnt refute my "poor political sense"?

Jesus youre a goddamned joke.

Anonymous said...

he has not refuted anything yet larry. why start now. lol. hes a fucking queenie.

Larry said...

I love how my comment [above] was ignored, yet you respond to the posts that talked about Judaism [on the Mancow thread], which had NOTHING to do with my story!

Anonymous said...

hes a fucking queenie, larry.

Anonymous said...

I would just like to know: where the NoZe society "calling the Holy Bible a hoax" stuff came from. Do you have any info on that? Did the NoZe society really belive that?