Friday, September 23, 2011

Former Speechwriter and Geopolitical Analyst Says Saudi Arabia Involved In 9/11 Attacks


Lloyds of London Suing Saudi Arabia for Funding 9/11 Attacks

by Larry Simons
September 23, 2011

Former speechwriter and geopolitical analyst Craig Hulet appeared on Coast to Coast with George Noory and revealed that insurance company Lloyd’s of London is suing Saudi Arabia government for funding the 9/11 attacks. Hulet revealed that George W. Bush personally intervened and made sure this information would not be made public.

Hulet also pointed out that one of the best pieces of evidence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction was the fact that the United States deployed ground troops to Iraq. He said we would have never deployed ground troops if Saddam had WMD’s because he would have used them against us as a result.

Listen to the interview

FOX News.com Kills Link to Poll Showing Ron Paul As Clear Winner of Last Night’s Debate


Link takes you to a blank page

by Larry Simons
September 23, 2011

Although Congressman Ron Paul was allowed virtually no time to speak last night, he still emerged as the winner of last night’s debate on a FOX News.com poll. But when you click the link “Who Won the Debate?” on the YouDecide archive page that displayed the poll originally, a blank white page comes up that says, “No content item selected” in the upper left hand corner of the screen. This link takes you directly there.

I wonder if the reason behind the killed link is because before the link was killed, Ron Paul had nearly 40% of the vote, making him the clear winner. Here is a screen shot of the poll obtained by PrisonPlanet after the poll had reached over 70,000 votes.



Here is a screen shot of what you see now when you click the link



This may be a glitch and it may be restored later on, but for now, it is being blocked for some reason.

Here is Ron Paul highlights at last night’s debate

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Lifestyles of the Religious Nutball: Pat Robertson Endorses Divorcing Spouse If They Get Alzheimer’s Disease


Christian fucknut Robertson adds to his long list of insane comments. And in doing so, repudiates the words of Jesus

by Larry Simons
September 18, 2011

On the September 13 telecast of The 700 Club, braindead Christian fucktard Pat Robertson, all too famous for his history of cruel and insane comments, added to that long list with yet another comment that should have been followed by a group of mental health officials walking onto the set of the show and placing Robertson in his much needed straight jacket.

A question was read on the air from a viewer that said his friend’s wife suffers from Alzheimer’s disease and that his wife doesn’t recognize him anymore. He said his friend was bitter at God for allowing his wife to be in that condition and that he has started seeing another woman. The viewer said his friend thinks he should be allowed to see other women because his wife, as he knew her, is gone.

Here was Robertson’s advice:

“That is a terribly hard thing. It is…I hate Alzheimer’s. It is one of the most awful things, because here is the loved one, this is the woman or man that you have loved for 20, 30, 40 years, and suddenly that person is gone. They’re gone. They are gone…I know it sounds cruel, but if he’s going to do something, he should divorce her and start all over again, but make sure she has custodial care and somebody looking after her.”

“Somebody” looking after her? You mean, like a husband? The kind of husband who will profess to love her “for better or worse”, “in sickness and in health” and “’til death do us part”? Someone like that? Aw wait, she already has a husband Robertson, you worthless, pathetic excuse for a human being.

watch the scumbag in action


Robertson’s co-host even brought up the fact that the vow you take is “for better or for worse”. Robertson’s response?:

“If you respect that vow, you say ’til death do us part.’ This is a kind of death.”

A “kind” of death? You mean, even though the person’s heart is still beating and they are breathing and they are not dead? I didn't realize there were several meanings for death in that vow.

The most mind-numbing aspect to this whole statement [other than the fact that Robertson is a bona fide and certified asshole] is that Robertson cannot even bring himself to suggest to the reader that even if his friend gets lonely and needs companionship, that it would be [even if not 100% OK, but at the very least] justified if he has a girlfriend on the side while still caring for his wife. No, not Robertson. Instead he suggests that the man completely abandon his wife and divorce her, leaving the job to ANOTHER PERSON.

Interestingly enough, Robertson, in suggesting divorce from and abandonment of the wife [the Alzheimer’s victim], is repudiating the very words of Jesus in Ephesians 5:25, which states:

“Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her”

Apparently, Robertson doesn’t think too highly of the Apostle Paul’s words and doesn’t really believe Christ loved the church. Or, it could be the fact that it is really Robertson's mind that is gone. Or, it could be the fact that Pat Robertson has a neurological disorder [required to believe the Bible in the first place] and he is about two more insensitive and horrendous comments away from the rubber room.

I go with all three.

Friday, September 16, 2011

Another Reason I Love Barry Manilow: He Supports Ron Paul


Manilow calls Congressman Paul “solid” and that he agrees with just about everything he says

by Larry Simons
September 16, 2011

Reporter for The Daily Caller, Nicholas Ballasy, stopped Grammy award-winning singer-songwriter Barry Manilow in Washington D.C. yesterday to ask him a few questions about his visit. Manilow was on Capital Hill speaking about atrial fibrillation, a heart disease that affects over 2 million Americans, including Manilow, who has fought the disease for 15 years.

Ballasy then asked Manilow about his support of Ron Paul in 2007. Manilow contributed to Ron Paul’s campaign then and still supports him now.

“I like him. I like what he says, I do. I like what he says. I think he’s solid,” said Manilow, who confirmed to The Daily Caller in an interview at the Capitol on Thursday that he contributed to Paul’s last campaign for president.

“I agree with just about everything he says. What can I tell you?” the 68-year-old Manilow added.

watch the clip

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Al Gore: 24 Hours Of Bullshit

Gore himself is a living example of how global warming alarmism is built on hypocrisy and pseudo-science

Paul Joseph Watson
& Alex Jones
Prison Planet.com
September 14, 2011

Al Gore is set to launch his 24 Hours of Reality propaganda blitz this evening in a desperate effort to reverse increasing skepticism towards global warming alarmism – but the jig is up – Gore himself is a living example of how climate change hysteria is built on a platform of greed, hypocrisy and faulty pseudo-science.

Polls show that increasing numbers of Americans
are not falling for the hocus pocus of man-made global warming, which is unsurprising given that Gore – one of its leading proponents – lives a lifestyle completely at odds with his own dogma.

Gore’s insistence that he is walking the walk, not just talking the talk, doesn’t seem to extend to his own private life in the context of energy conservation and CO2 emissions. While lecturing the world about reducing CO2 emissions and saving energy, Gore’s own mansion uses 20 times the energy of the average American home.

In February 2007, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research revealed that the gas and electric bills for the former vice president’s 20-room home and pool house devoured nearly 221,000 kilowatt-hours in 2006, more than 20 times the national average of 10,656 kilowatt-hours. These figures were not disputed by Gore.

“If this were any other person with $30,000-a-year in utility bills, I wouldn’t care,” said the Center’s president, Drew Johnson. “But he tells other people how to live and he’s not following his own rules.”

As the leading luminary of the global warming movement, you would expect Al Gore to live up to the standards he lectures everyone else about, particularly in relation to population control. Gore recently called on women to access “fertility management” (abortion) in order to stabilize global population.

However, Gore has four children of his own, who presumably enjoy the luxury of his $8.8 million seaside mansion in Montecito, California (absent any worries about rising sea levels).

Gore is set to become the first “carbon billionaire”, but he offsets his multiple-times the average power consumption by purchasing carbon credits ….bought largely from his own company, Generation Investment Management.

Aside from Gore’s own hypocritical lifestyle, the science behind man-made global warming is also being increasingly discredited, which is precisely why the former vice-president feels the need to reinforce the myth of anthropogenic climate change, particularly as a mere 24% of Americans think he is an expert on the subject.

“Gore is completely wrong when he tells us that the science of climate change is settled. If his “Climate Reality Project” actually did promote climate realism, he would tell us that the science is in a period of negative discovery — the more we learn, the more we realize we do not understand about this, arguably the most complex science ever tackled. Rather than “remove the doubt,” as Gore says, we need to recognize the doubt,” writes Tom Harris.

But that dogma is being contested by more and more reputable scientists who are finally speaking out in an organized fashion. For example, on August 29, a blockbuster science document was published that totally refutes Gore and Ban — the Interim Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). Coauthored by a team of scientists recruited and led by climate experts Dr. Craig Idso, Professor Robert Carter, and Professor Fred Singer, the NIPCC shows that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has ignored or misinterpreted much of the research that challenges the need for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas controls. In other words, the science being relied upon by governments worldwide to create multi-billion dollar climate policies is almost certainly wrong.

Consider extreme weather, the main topic of 24 Hours of Reality. Gore promotes the concept that greenhouse gas-induced global warming is leading to increasingly severe weather. But this defies logic. If the world warms due to increasing greenhouse gas emissions, temperatures at high latitudes are forecast to rise most, reducing the difference between arctic and tropical temperatures. Since this differential drives weather, we should see weaker midlatitude cyclones in a warmer world, and so less extremes in weather, not more.

Gore’s emotional appeal in his film that predicates on the ludicrous notion that polar bears are not strong swimmers and will drown because of melting polar ice caps has been vehemently discredited by new figures from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which show, “That the polar bear population is currently at 20,000 to 25,000 bears, up from as low as 5,000-10,000 bears in the 1950s and 1960s. A 2002 U.S. Geological Survey of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain noted that the polar bear populations ‘may now be near historic highs,’” it read.

In addition, catastrophic sea level rises attributed to man-made CO2 emissions, a claim repeatedly invoked by Gore, have also failed to live up to their hype in recent times. Data recorded over the last several years clearly indicates that sea level rises have slowed down and are now flat.

All the king’s horses and all the king’s men, never mind a 24-hour TV bore-athon, cannot put the global warming myth back together again. Gore’s 24 hours of bullshit will only serve to exemplify the flailing desperation of climate change doomsayers as their dire proclamations are increasingly proven laughable by mother nature herself.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Santorum Exploits 9/11 Tragedy by Repeating Bush’s Lie That America Was Attacked Because Muslims “Hate our Freedoms”


Ron Paul gets booed for simply speaking the truth as to why we were attacked on 9/11

by Larry Simons
September 13, 2011

In yesterday’s Tea Party debate in Florida, the issue of 9/11 and national security came up. Texas Congressman Ron Paul chimed in and gave his typical response, that we should cut military spending, bring the troops home and stop being the policemen of the world.

Neocon and Christian nut Rick Santorum was called on to respond to Congressmen Paul. Santorum mentioned that Ron Paul had a post on his website on Sunday that had blamed the United States for the September 11, 2001 attacks. In his Guiliani-esque manner, never to miss a chance to exploit 9/11 for his personal gain, especially since the 10th anniversary of 9/11 was just the day prior, Santorum said this to Paul:

“You said that it was our actions that brought about the actions of 9/11. Now, Congressman Paul, that is irresponsible….someone who is running for the President of the United States in the Republican Party, should not be parroting what Osama bin Laden said on 9/11. We are not being attacked, and we were not attacked because of our actions. We were attacked….because we have a civilization that is antithetical to the civilization of the jihadist. And they want to kill us because of who we are and what we stand for. We stand for American exceptionalism. We stand for freedom and opportunity for everybody around the world.”

Thank you George W. Giuliani.

Not only is Santorum flat out lying and regurgitating a decade-old debunked issue, but he is exploiting the 9/11 tragedy by lying to the American people just one day after the 10th anniversary of the attacks.

Congressman Paul responded in the midst of being booed. The booing was without a doubt a direct result from the fact that 9/11 is heavily on the minds of the Florida crowd since it was a day after the 10th anniversary of the attacks. Santorum knew that, and wanted to seize the opportunity to exploit that fact so bad, he did so with a colossal lie.

Santorum knew that since it was a day after the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, all he had to do was spew the buzz words: freedom, 9/11 and Bin Laden, and the Jeb Bush-loving Florida crowd would erupt with thunderous applause and boo anyone who thought otherwise.

Paul responded:

“As long as this country follows that idea, we’re going to be under a lot of danger. This whole idea that the whole Muslim world is responsible for this and they’re attacking us because we’re free and prosperous, that is just not true. Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda have been explicit, they have been explicit and they wrote and said that we attacked America because you had bases on our holy land in Saudi Arabia, you do not give Palestinians a fair treatment and you have been bombing…[crowd boos]…I didn’t say that, I’m trying to get you to understand what the motive was behind the bombing. At the same time, we had been bombing and killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis for 10 years. Would you be annoyed? If you’re not annoyed, there’s some problem.”



It turns out that Ron Paul is correct. In a 1998 interview conducted by ABC’s John Miller, Bin Laden said these words:

“The call to wage war against America was made because America has spear-headed the crusade against the Islamic nation, sending tens of thousands of its troops to the land of the two Holy Mosques over and above its meddling in its affairs and its politics, and its support of the oppressive, corrupt and tyrannical regime that is in control. These are the reasons behind the singling out of America as a target.”

To the question asked by Miller [to bin Laden]:

You've been painted in America as a terrorist leader. To your followers, you are a hero. How do you see yourself?

Osama said this:

As I have said, we are not interested in what America says. We do not care. We view ourselves and our brothers like everyone else. Allah created us to worship Him and to follow in his footsteps and to be guided by His Book. I am one of the servants of Allah and I obey his orders. Among those is the order to fight for the word of Allah ... and to fight until the Americans are driven out of all the Islamic countries.”

Does that sound like Osama has ever sat around giving a two-cent shit that Americans are FREE?

One idiot blogger is so desperate to distort and twist Ron Paul’s words, that she deliberately lied and said when Ron Paul said “I didn’t say that” after the boos started, he was denying what he just said. I posted this on her blog, and naturally it was deleted.

You said:

"The audience was right to boo Paul’s follow-up….especially on the remark about the Palestinians. Ron Paul immediately said, when he heard the boos, “I didn’t say that.” Oh yes, you did say that, Congressman Paul."

Paul wasn't denying that HE said something by saying, "I didn't say that". He is clearly speaking the words of bin Laden prior to the boos, and when the crowd booed, he is simply saying, "I didn't say that" [in other words, he is saying "these aren't MY words", they are bin Laden's]. Anyone can clearly understand that. But you, like Santorum, LIE on your blog and make it appear as if Ron Paul is denying his own words. He's not. He's saying those aren't HIS words, they're bin Laden's. Now, will you make the correction or leave the LIE posted?

It truly amazes me that even after 10 years since 9/11, people still believe this monstrous lie that Muslims “hate us for our freedoms”. It’s long-debunked and just plain moronic. If this was true, why did it take them 225 years [between 1776 and 2001] to discover we are free and prosperous? The World Trade Center had been around since 1971. We weren’t free and prosperous in 1971?

Rick Santorum is a lying, neocon Christian lunatic. His own state of Pennsylvania didn’t even want him re-elected in 2006, what makes him believe anyone wants him as President?

To illustrate the intellect of this Floridian audience, below is a clip during the health care questioning of last night’s debate of Wolf Blitzer asking Ron Paul a hypothetical question. Blitzer asks Ron Paul what he would do if a healthy 30-year-old man who made a good living decided not to buy health care because he was healthy, but then all of a sudden became ill and really needed the health care. Blitzer then asked, “Should society just let him die?”

The crowd erupted with applause and you can hear several people say “Yeah!”. Ron Paul disagreed with the cheering audience and said simply that it’s not the government’s responsibility and that when he practiced medicine in the early 1960’s, the community and churches took care of the sick and Dr. Paul personally never turned anyone away.

This Florida crowd of mindless barbarians would do otherwise, as indicated in the below clip. They cheer the idea of letting an uninsured man die. This alone makes me happy they booed Ron Paul.

Keep in mind, these audience members were the same lunatics who booed Ron Paul when he gave the real reason we were attacked on 9/11. Apparently, these people aren't real Tea Party members; they are members of the Insane Tea Party that was hijacked by their nutty leaders, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachman.

watch the clip

Sunday, September 11, 2011

10 Lies Enshrined by H.Res. 391 to “Never Forget” 9/11


Activist Post
September 11, 2011

The official version of the events of 9/11 are deemed written in stone according to a new 5-page House Resolution (pdf) which was passed to Never Forget 9/11. The intention is great, in theory. However, the facts are completely warped.

Enumerated below is a summary of the points of the Resolution, with links providing outright refutation, or questions surrounding such statements.
Whereas,

1. The fourth plane was prevented from being used as a weapon against America by brave passengers: While this narrative is emotionally compelling, the facts of flight 93 remain open for debate. For starters, there are too many inconsistencies with the notion that cell phone calls could have been made from the plane that day. Thus, this storyline seems immediately debunked considering the faulty source of supposed communication. Most likely the plane was shot down, as Donald Rumsfeld said on video. The size of the debris field also indicated a break-up prior to impact.

2. The attacks destroyed both towers of the World Trade Center, as well as adjacent buildings: This seems to acknowledge Building 7 — a building that was not mentioned by the 9-11 Commission report. Building 7 was undeniably a controlled demolition, never having been hit by a plane. WTC lease-owner Larry Silverstein is even on video admitting to the planned demolition.

3. The attacks targeted symbols of America’s success and were intended to assail its noble principles, values and freedoms: Since 9/11, the United States has grossly assailed its own principles, values, and freedoms in the reaction to the attacks through preemptive wars, torture, removal of Habeas Corpus, and all of the atrocities to freedom that the PATRIOT Act and the Department of Homeland Security have inflicted. The current principles don’t seem so noble when your child is being fondled by the TSA.

4. Memorials have been constructed to honor the victims of these attacks and to pay tribute to the heroic action of those who have served our communities and our country: First responders who risked their lives were first deceived about the air quality by the EPA, made to fight and beg for sufficient health care, run through a terror watch list, and have been denied a place at 10th Anniversary Ceremony, which is supposedly being given to honor courage and resolve. Quite a tribute!

5. 10 years after 9/11, 2001, the U.S. continues to fight terrorists and other extremists: All major terror groups, and their actions — most notably Al Qaeda — have in fact been supported by the U.S. government, while the anti-terror apparatus now ignores even its own justification by turning it on average, law-abiding, peaceful Americans. Are we supposed to honor that this misguided war continues with no end in sight?

6. Numerous laws have been enacted to assist victims of terrorism, combat terrorism at home and abroad, and support members of the Armed Forces: The American government lied them into wars of aggression, allowed private insurers to steal death benefits from the families of veterans, and demonized returning veterans as potential terrorists. Bravo!

7. To express gratitude to the efforts of personnel involved in the removal of Osama bin Laden: Bin Laden had been dead 9 times over before the staged hoax of his “removal.” His initial training and funding provably came from the CIA, and the FBI could never provide evidence of his involvement in the September 11th attacks. At this point, who cares about bin Laden anyway? He seems to be just one of the many puppets being used to continue the phony War on Terror.

8. The terrorist attacks that have occurred around the world since 9/11/01 remind us of the hateful inhumanity of terrorism: Excellent point, so long as the Western-backed NATO “humanitarian missions” are included as terrorist attacks being referred to.

9. The Nation is indebted to all personnel serving in war zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan in advancement of national interests: The interests served are actually global corporate interests, not American interests, as they have provably weakened America financially and morally.

10. Thousands of families have lost loved ones in the defense of freedom and liberty against the tyranny of terror and not diminished the pain caused by the senseless loss of 3,000 persons killed on 9/11/01: They were not the only ones. Mass tyrannical invasions and drone strikes have killed hundreds of thousands and displaced millions more around the world. It’s true that freedom fighters, defending their homeland from outside invasion, have been tortured and maimed. Wait, who’s defending freedom and liberty, and who is initiating violence and tyranny?

This Resolution is an appalling attempt to convince the nation to lie to itself, despite polls which continue to show that a majority of Americans think we overreacted, overspent and weakened ourselves through the War on Terror. This proposal by Eric Cantor wishes to enshrine a false view of both history and the present . . . and set it in stone for the future. How can America hope to reverse the race downhill to tyranny and infamy without analyzing facts? We need to voice our outrage over this despicable cover-up and propagandizing of a national tragedy — that tragedy being 9/11 AND the decade of worldwide oppression that has followed. Indeed, let us never forget.

Friday, September 9, 2011

Andy Ostroy Deletes My Comments on His YouTube Page


This is not shocking of course. It’s just additional evidence that I get deleted by Ostroy when he claims I use “hateful speech” and “vitriol”, which the evidence shows I do not

by Larry Simons
September 9, 2011

Our favorite liberal wingnut Andy Ostroy is up to his old tricks again; deleting comments that are not “vicious” or “hateful”. As if Ostroy needed more mediums to show that he is a colossal fraud, he now has a YouTube page in which he now displays his fraudiness in video form [oh boy!].

Unlike his own website, in which he screens comments with comment moderation enabled, his YouTube page allows comments [for now]. So, I thought, what a good way to finally let others see that Ostroy is one big fraud-a-mopolous.

It only took two days for me to post comments and for Ostroy to delete them from his page.

Here is a screen shot of a comment I posted where I include my website and invite people to come to my site and read all about the liberal Bill O’ Reilly [Ostroy]. Notice the comment directly below my comment by another YouTube user that says, “Hillary is the most extraordinary woman ever!” It was posted two hours before my comment.

[click to enlarge]


Two days later, Ostroy deleted my comment, along with 3 other comments I posted that I did not save the screen shots of. You can see here that my comment was deleted [My comment in the above screen shot is removed but the “Hillary is the most extraordinary woman ever!” post is still there. I added a new comment today, pointing out my comments were deleted].



It is plain to see, Ostroy is a colossal fraud and the fact that popular mainstream websites like the Huffington Post and mainstream news outlets like MSNBC and FOX have him on their TV programs and internet programs and pay him as a contributor shows that the corporate-controlled media has no interest in the truth.

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Ron Paul Annihilates So-Called "Top Tier" in MSNBC Online Poll

After a near 180,000 votes, Ron Paul wins online poll by 70,000 votes [40 percentage points]

by Larry Simons
September 8, 2011

Ron Paul has dominated the MSNBC online poll, by destroying all other GOP candidates by gaining a whopping 98,000 votes in a poll in which [so far] over 180,000 votes have been tallied.

The so-called "top tier" by the corporate-controlled mainstream media: Romney, Perry and Bachman combined only received just under 55,000 votes, while Congressman Paul raked in nearly 98,000 votes. Romney, Perry and Bachman came in 2nd, 3rd and 7th in the poll respectively.

Second place was Mitt Romney, gaining a mere 28,000 votes, which Paul surpassed by a staggering 70,000 votes. In fact, Paul received more votes than ALL SEVEN REMAINING CANDIDATES. Paul received 98,000 votes, while ALL OTHERS COMBINED received just under 82,000 votes [Paul STILL winning by 16,000 votes].

[click to enlarge]


This won't matter to the bought-and-paid-for-media establishment. They will still continue their complete blackout of Ron Paul as if he doesn't even exist, let alone dominate polls.

Pictures Show Perry Physically Intimidating Ron Paul


Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
September 8, 2011

Alex Jones Comment: Ron Paul’s campaign needs to make a public statement on this incident. Perry’s thuggish behavior is identical to how he confronted me in a Mexican restaurant several years ago.

Pictures taken during a commercial break in last night’s GOP debate at the Reagan Presidential Library document how Texas Governor Rick Perry attempted to physically intimidate Congressman Ron Paul, prompting Paul’s security to intervene.

Photographs published by the AP and Reuters show a stern looking Perry holding Paul’s wrist and waving a finger in his face. [pictured above]

Reports by Fox News and International Business Times state that during the break Perry “walked up to Paul’s podium, physically grabbed Paul’s wrist, and pointed at Paul’s face with his other hand.”

A third man, said to be Paul’s security guard, is seen approaching the podium in the picture.

Another photo shows Perry with arms outstretched, leaning in towards Paul engaging in what may be considered lively conversation to say the least. Some Paul supporters have suggested that the shot shows that Perry physically forced Paul away from his own podium during the commercial.



The two candidates were situated directly next to each other during the firey televised debate.

Before the exchange took place, Paul and Perry locked horns in a sharp exchange of words, with the Congressman calling out Perry on his support for ‘HillaryCare’ and his issuance of an executive order to forcibly vaccinate 12-year-old girls against HPV.

Ron Paul’s latest campaign ad, which ran during the debate commercials, also targeted Perry, exposing his previous record as a Democrat and his intimate links to Al Gore’s 1988 Presidential campaign.

The images clearly indicate that Perry tried to physically intimidate the Congressman. The two campaigns have been asked to clarify what actually occurred during the exchange.

Here are Ron Paul highlights from last night's debate. What could have sparked Perry's thuggish behavior is what Ron Paul says at 3:02 and 5:26 in the below clip

Thursday, September 1, 2011

31 Questions Christians Can’t Answer

Josh McDowell’s “Answers to Tough Questions” Is A Joke. These Are the REAL Tough Questions

by Larry Simons
September 1, 2011

With much help from Vincent Bugliosi’s book Divinity of Doubt: The God Question and from a few questions I threw in myself, here is a list of [in my opinion] impossible questions for Christians to answer. They are in no particular order of importance. They are just random questions that I am sure every Christian would ignore.

1. Why hasn’t God intervened on the tyrants throughout history to prevent far worse atrocities than in the Old Testament days in which he did intervene?

2. If God were all-powerful, why wouldn’t he create humans who could appreciate good without having evil to compare it with?

3. If God were all-perfect and all-powerful, why would he do such a poor job and create such an imperfect world with its deadly earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, etc?

4. If God is all-perfect, how could he, and why would he create such extremely imperfect human beings to occupy this world?

5. Why would God need 122 “constants” to provide life on Earth?
(“constants” are precise scientific conditions in which if altered slightly [like the Earth being just 1% closer to the sun], life on Earth would cease)

6. If God could create the universe by the wave of his hand or the utterance of a command, why not make Earth dependent on nothing to sustain life?

7. Why did Moses write in the third person in the first five books of the Old Testament?

8. How could Moses write about his own death [and beyond] in Deuteronomy 34:10-11?

9. If God is all-knowing, why did God ask Adam where he was and whether he had eaten fruit in Genesis?
(If the answer to this question is “so God could test Adam’s integrity”, why would God not have already known this since he is all-knowing and knows the hearts of man?)

10. Why did God create mankind at all if in Genesis God said he was sorry he created them?

11. Why did God create human beings to have a sinful nature?

12. If God is all-just, how can he possibly punish mankind for what Adam did?

13. If God is all-just, why does he punish/kill massive amounts of people throughout the Bible for the sins of one?

Examples:

*God murdered 70,000 Israelites by inflicting them with disease because one man, David, conducted a census

*God punished Egypt with 10 plagues, which included murdering all male first-born babies because God had a vendetta against Pharaoh [whose heart was hardened by God so that Pharaoh could not release the Israelites even if he wanted to]

*God puts all of mankind to death because of Adam’s sin


14. Why did God feel the need to show mankind his love? And why does he need love returned from sinful, wretched mankind?

15. Why was Jesus’ death on the cross the ONLY way sins could be forgiven?

16. Why can’t God just wave his hand and destroy the devil?

17. How infinite can Jesus’ love be if for those who reject him as being their savior, he consigns them to an everlasting hell?

18. If God is so good, why does he put all of us to death?

19. How can a human being believe he has the capacity to love an imponderable, dream-like abstraction such as God more than his own wife and children?

20. Where did Satan get the power to tempt us into all of our sins?

21. If God chooses to allow the devil to continue to exist, knowing he is going to tempt us into sin, isn’t God making the devil his agent?

22. How can God be good when he nearly always turns down the praying party when they need him the most?

23. Why do people pray to God after a tragedy like 9/11 or Katrina when they are praying to the party that caused or allowed it?

24. If faith in God is worth anything, shouldn’t he want us to reach him through our reason rather than unthinkingly through blind faith?

25. Why did the prophet Isaiah [in Isaiah 7:14], in his foretelling of the birth of Jesus, use the Hebrew word “almah”, which means “young woman” and not use the word “betulah”, which means “virgin”, when describing Jesus’ mother?

26. Why did God contradict himself in Genesis by creating the sun and moon on the fourth day [Gen. 1: 16-19] to provide light during the day and night when he already created light for the day and night on the first day [Gen. 1: 3-5]?

27. If God is all-knowing, why did he not know until the very moment in which Abraham was about to sacrifice his son Isaac that Abraham feared God?

28. Why does the Bible say, “God is love” [1 John 4:8], “love is not jealous” [1 Corinthians 13: 4] and “God is jealous” [Exodus 20:5]? [Deductive reasoning makes it impossible for all three verses to be true simultaneously].

29. Why did God make Noah build a Titanic-sized boat when God could have simply spoken a boat into existence?

30. According to Noah’s genealogy in Genesis chapter 5, Noah’s grandfather, Methuselah, died the exact same year of the flood. Was Methuselah killed in the flood? If so, why would Noah be so faithful to a god that murdered his grandfather? Was Methuselah evil [to therefore to have been included in the evil population God killed in the flood]?

31. Why is it that God is allowed to possess a characteristic [jealousy, in Deut. 4:24 and Exodus 20:5] that the Bible itself denounces in Proverbs 27:4 and 14:30?