Posts Tagged ‘refuted’

Proof Congresswoman ilhan Omar is a Racist Liar Who Married Her Brother

These aren’t rumors, but facts backed up by pictures/screenshots and official documents. Wikipedia is falsely claiming it’s a conspiracy theory. There’s even some wacko know-it-all “ex-lawyer” (great credential!) “Charles” on quora making a faps3 and absurd lie that “the press corps” (what the hell is that?!) disproved this with DNA, wow, just lies!

Key smoking gun (besides the pictures and social media admissions by Ilhan’s brother: her first known husband, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, has the same birthdate as a man with the same name that his fellow students say had the same dad as Ilhan (as in the dad has the same name), the same as that of her brother (who in social media posts twice was pictured with Ilhan), a brother she has not publically disclosed as a sibling/brother (and she will not give out the last names of her family, why? Because their real last names is ‘not’ Omar, but ‘Elmi’). Ilhan and others of her family lied about their last names in order to claim relationship to the Omar (Somali) family for quick access to U.S. and U.K. citizenship. Ahmad was apparently intelligent enough stay outside of America, probably realizing that if he were found out would be the target of harassment and would have had a chance of being arrested by ICE (the immigration police).

New Evidence Supports Claims That Ilhan Omar Married Her Brother

100% Proof Ilhan Omar Married Her Brother

ilhan’s Brother Caught Lying About His Education

Why Is This Now New News? Omar Charged With Fraud

INCEST OMAR: Loomer Launches New Merch to Raise Awareness About Ilhan Omar Marrying Brother

Star-Tribune wrote it, “could neither conclusively confirm nor rebut the allegation that he is Omar’s sibling.” in February 2019, said “the evidence uncovered thus far isn’t definitive enough to come down on one side or the other.”

For those of you liberals who wonder why I care, it’s because 1. I’m Jewish, or consider myself so as my dad is Jewish (I do not care that in Judaism the mom only counts – it’s a racist doctrine, as Abraham was called the first “Jew” and yet is an Assyrian, and Moses’ wife was an Ethiopian, yet clearly God had considered Moses’ future family line as being sufficient as Jews when God pretended he was about to wipe out most of or half the Jews who were rebellious). 2. Laura Loomer is Jewish and racists within the liberal community are persecuting her and calling her a conspiracy theorist on Wikipedia. 3. On Quora I see a shady guy calling himself “Charles” and an “ex-lawyer” with an unbelievable “24,000+” answers on (and a significant yet underwhelming following of 9,900 followers) gave a very suspicious answer about Ilhan, by outright lying and using the infantile and illogical claim that to consider a false accusation is “old hat” that is (possibly) 9 years old (what matters is if it’s true, and it’s coming to light in mass as she became a government official whose opposing the president, all Jews and who can sabotage America via its immigration laws). Something of an interesting side note is that the expression/term/phrase, “old hat” is sexist:

“slang. The vulva. Also: sexual intercourse; a woman regarded as a means of sexual gratification. Now arch. and rare.” – Oxford Dictionary. Ironically the very term “old hat” there is claimed to be a near extinct phrase, itself, old. It originally seems to have meant, “a woman who was only good for sex due to her uselessness and old age” or “a female only good for sex as her vagina has been repeatedly used for sex by more than one male, in otherwords, a “slut”. Shouldn’t Charles, playing know-it-all ex-lawyer (he’s a writer for Apple Inc., too, allegedly) have been careful not to use a sexist expression? It is evidence that Charles is carelessly posting answers. Further evidence is that the expression the way he implied it shows an illogical and criminal state of mind as it’s meaning morphed to, include, “colloq. In predicative use: something considered to be old-fashioned, out of date, unoriginal, or hackneyed.” Since when would wondering about a recently discovered accusation be, “unoriginal” or “old-fashioned”. “Out of date” is an expression itself that refers to style and as such is itself discriminatory/prejudiced then against clothing choice, makeup and hairstyle and by extension then, the treasured doctrine of “liberal diversity”. So, Charles isn’t even using the term correctly and ironically one that itself is considered “out of fashion” to even use and not original/no longer new. Charles meant however, “old news” (apparently trying to force a new meaning to sound clever, original and wise by using a rare term – talk about “weird” and nonsensical”!)

Does it’s older use matter? Of course it does, because in a very large population who seeks information on everything and regarding a very controversial topic in tbe major news people will end up digging into everything, and ironically this topic was something that required some deep digging!

Anne Curzan, an English professor at the University of Michigan claims that the obsolete (pardon this side-topic pun) use of words and phrases no longer counts as what the meaning was replaced with, which true or not, doesn’t excuse Charles’ dually wrong use 1. It’s more modern use applies to fashion 2. He meant it to mean “a topic so old everyone knew about it and that’s been disproven”. 1. It was never a widely known topic as Ilhan herself was obscure and rarely in the news. 2. Again, a thing’s age has nothing to do with it being true or false, it’s grossly childish thinking, like saying, “the Bible is old, so we should completely ignore it” or “climate change”, “rape”, “homosexuality”, “lying”, “evolution”, “evil”. It’s as childish as the expression “judgmental”, itself in it’s modern usage a nonsensical phrase.

The 3rd reason I care about Ilhan’s criminal acts and words, specifically her unlawful marraige is that I don’t think this news has gotten the attention it deserves, as it shows how gullible people, liberal or not, can be in accepting someone merely for the sake of “diversity” (which seems to me to be a word liberals are using out of their dislike for the traditional liberal pretentious ideal of total “unity”/agreement, which truly just meant, “agreement with liberal beliefs/philosophy” – but of course has a conotation of accepting even Christian fundamentalist beliefs which liberals despise, so, they switched to “diversity”, meaning in liberal context, “you don’t have to agree with everyone and any claim like that blacks are mentally inferior, but treat everyone equally under the law, like gays who wish to have the same marraige rights as hetros”, which itsef is hypocritical and impossible as liberals cannot even agree when human life becomes human, and so denies the rights of defenseless babies, and cannot agree when even a preteen child – if at all – should have the right to suicide or have an so called “sex-change”!).

Liberlism is very convoluted. I think too conservatism is too, and perhaps worse, as it seems to imply the Bible sanctions free speech, even lying of the kind liberals use to destroy conservatism. What conservatives fear is their “free speech” to question anything held sacred or “mainstream” or to blaspheme or make statements that merely over being disagreeable, being used to prosecute, censure and execute them over, a fear or concern due to the Catholic Church (a Christian-pagan cult, with an anti-Jewish streak) having used religious doctrines they held sacred (and the Puritans who misused evidence of witchcraft) to do such things. But the conservative and liberal method of dealing with the Catholic and Puritan misuse of religious doctrine is no better. It should never be legal to sanction what traditionally is considered blasphemy or malicious speech that is meant to incite violence or strife, especially random, like a verbal dirty bomb. Example, if I say, “Liberals and conservatives are both fags” or, “Christians are deluded liars”, it should be a criminal slander offense, but ones being broad like that with no direct blasphemy should have a death penalty, just some fine, community service, public rebuke, or a three days in jail. The worse the maliciousness the worse the punishment. Example, if I said, “kids should be tortured for fun”, I’d say that’s six months slaving in some farm, or a year in jail, second offense, double, third, triple, and so on or being committed to a maximum security mental institution until it can be determined by twelve psychologist that whoever said that is not a psychopath or narcissist (two types of mentally ill humans I believe should be in prisons for the insane and pathologically dangerous).

Ilhan’s crimes merit deportation back to Somalia. However, if she admitted the truth, recanted that Jews have magically put the world in a trance (much of the world is disgusted by Jews, so how would that even come close to being true?) and was willing to spend a year in a prison in her home state learning to tolerate Jewish diversity and hear the Bible read each day, I’d say let her stay. That is merciful, unlike Sharia-Muslim law, requiring upwards of 80-200+ lashings with a pronged whip, and even being stoned to death. The Bible only calls for forty lashes for FALSE WITNESS and stoning only by someone who is considered morally pure – part of God’s wise and merciful way of “checks and balances”, till Christ’s return.

Atheist Evolutionists of National Geographic “Solved Mystery” Everyone!

September 7, 2010 Leave a comment

The Yeti crab is blind, yet still manages to see better than atheists with eyes that can see.

Check it out everyone, the atheist evolutionists of National Geographic have committed high blasphemy against Father Darwin by not mentioning evolution in one of their articles!:

Mystery Solved … Crab Swarm

A new study solves a longstanding mystery surrounding the crabs: how the the normally sedentary species has the stamina to “undergo one of the most arduous migrations on Earth,” in the words of study co-author Lucy Turner.

When the wet season blows into Christmas Island (map) each year, millions of Christmas Island red crabs hike for several days, from a high rain forest plateau down to Indian Ocean beaches, where the crabs mate in burrows.

“It’s an amazing feat—going from not being able to exercise for more than ten minutes to walking for several miles,” said Turner, a biologist at the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom.

But by sampling circulatory fluid—the equivalent of blood—from migrating crabs, Turner and colleagues discovered that a surge in the crustacean hyperglycemic hormone works with glucose, an energy-producing sugar, to fuel the epic trek.

(See “World’s Longest Migration Found—Two Times Longer Than Thought.”)

The crab’s endocrine system also stockpiles enough sugar to allow the crabs to return to their forest homes, Turner added.

Study published in the September issue of the Journal of Experimental Biology.

—Christine Dell’Amore

Published September 3, 2010

(Just forget how the crab’s evolved to have such a system everyone and focus on how National Geographic posted a sciency “discovery”. Don’t ask questions, no further explanations needed; evolutionists are the bestiest, rightiest, “no Gods no guilt” non-group group of people with no beliefs, I mean who have different beliefs (and no similar ones, but “atheists are perfect.” Just look, they even posted a story on the danger of BPA SEVEN DAYS AGO! THEY ARE REALLY LEADING THE WAY ON HEALTH WARNINGS NOW! WOOOOOOIE! (This health campaign by Christians and others from May 12, 1999 to eliminate BPA doesn’t really count, it’s nooooot reeeeeeeeeeal peeeeeeoople, nothing to see here.) And they are letting tons of people comment too can’t you see?! Oh wait, they still have none, might be because everytime I try they give me the friendly message: “You are not allowed to comment.” Only atheists may speak their deep thoughts, like, “be honest you damn theists! Stop being hypocrites! I love to get drunk and act stupid with my sisters and try to deconvert them to atheism.” Atheists are so profound and scientific.)

Related Post:


See also: for more information on fundamentally ill atheists.

Catholics and Lisa Miller Refuted: Evidence of Pre-Christian Jews

Post link:

Ian Punnett had on a heretic as a guest this morning on Coast to Coast A.M., and it was the senior editor of the liberal news magazine called Newsweek: Lisa Miller, whose book “on Heaven” he helped peddle. She claimed on C2C and in her book, that no Jew before Daniel spoke about Heaven as a place you go to for being righteous (which is nonsensical since Daniel didn’t teach that) and that therefore no Jews had any expectation to go there (which is also nonsensical since not finding evidence that someone said something before someone else, is not evidence that they didn’t or didn’t think such a thing), She also taught that no Jew thought of heaven as anything other than the sky, except that God and angels lived there. She also implied or said in various ways, that no Jews were Christians till Christ was born. She probably believes in her simpleton mind because “Jesus” isn’t said anywhere in the Old Testament (as if God can’t refer to someone without using their name, and yet “Jesus” is in the Old Testament, it’s spelled “Joshua”, which in Hebrew is pronounced, “Yeshua”. Sound familiar?).

Lisa’s false teachings are contradicted by the Bible:

The 1st evidence:

In Genesis 1, God lives neither in “the sky” or earth, as neither had existed until he made them, and Genesis 1 says that God’s Spirit, “hovered” over the waters he made.

From that chapter people would have gotten the impression that God already had a dwelling place and that he “hovered” above Earth, rather than walking on it.

The 2nd evidence:

Also in Genesis 1, going on to 2, God’s word says, “God called the expanse ‘heaven.’ And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day. … And God said, ‘Let there be lights in the expanse of the heaven to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the heaven to give light on the earth. Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.” – Genesis 1-2

The 3rd evidence:

Only four chapters later, in the days of Noah, it says,

“And God saw the earth, and behold, it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.” – Genesis 6:12

The 4th evidence:

In the next chapter the concept that God saves those who are righteous is taught:

“Yahweh then said to Noah, ‘Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I have found you righteous in this generation.'” – Genesis 7:1

To some, that verse would have made them think that God was looking down upon the Earth from some place above. In Genesis 1 God spoke to Adam and Eve and in Genesis 6 God spoke to Noah, and they indicate that none of these three saw God when he spoke to them (and if they did surely the Bible would have mentioned such great and exceptional events). Some people who read those parts of the Bible might have concluded that God surely had some visible appearance (and so believed that he must have been speaking from some place higher than even the stars. But Genesis also indicated that God was near to the location of Adam and Eve and Noah, and to some this might have indicated that God was invisible or some may have thought that figuratively speaking he was focusing his attention on them, and was therefore near them in that sense (it is only much later in the Bible that it indicates God is in all places spiritually, though secretly God may have let people know before that, that that was so.)

The 5th evidence:

Six chapters later however, it is made more evident that there is a definite place other than the sky, the area where the stars are and Earth:

“Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High, and he blessed Abram, saying, ‘Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Creator of Heaven and earth.” – Genesis 14:18-19

Notice that Melchizedek did not say, “heavens”, plural, which would have included the “sky” and the area where stars were, which today we call “space”. Instead, he said, “Heaven”, singular, referring to something other than the obvious two that everyone can see.

The 6th evidence:

Though God is all powerful (he created the universe and all the life in it) and able to see anywhere as the Bible seemed to indicate in the previous five chapters all the way up to Genesis 6:12, where God speaks to Noah, but is apparently invisible to him, and the Jews reading up to that point would have gotten the impression that God was invisible. But later in Exodus, God showed himself in various ways to the Jews living while Moses was alive, repeatedly, and this would have given some, at that time, the impression that God could be seen, but had been hiding himself:

From the events in Exodus, the Jews and those by and among them might have gotten the impression that God was a being that was easily seen and therefore if he had been in the sky the whole time, they would have known it (and there would surely be records of such a sight recorded all over the world as it would be something unusual):

“God led the people around by the way of the wilderness toward the Red Sea. And the people of Israel went up out of the land of Egypt equipped for battle. Moses took the bones of Joseph with him, for Joseph had made the sons of Israel solemnly swear, saying, “God will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones with you from here.” And they moved on from Succoth and encamped at Etham, on the edge of the wilderness. And Yahweh went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them along the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, that they might travel by day and by night. The pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night did not depart from before the people. – Exodus 13:18-22

“And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet with God; and they stood at the nether part of the mount. And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because Yahweh descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly.” – Exodus 19:17-18

“Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of Yahweh filled the tabernacle. And Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting because the cloud settled on it, and the glory of Yahweh filled the tabernacle. Throughout all their journeys, whenever the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle, the people of Israel would set out. But if the cloud was not taken up, then they did not set out till the day that it was taken up. For the cloud of Yahweh was on the tabernacle by day, and fire was in it by night, in the sight of all the house of Israel throughout all their journeys.” – Exodus 40:34-38

The 7th and 8th evidences:

There are also two strong evidences that the gospel (the “good news” (of salvation from Hell and man being able to have eternal peace though Jesus) was known, just as the Jesus taught and others in the New Testament did, to Adam and others early on. Even Cain knew from what this verse implies, in which Cain said:

“Behold, you have driven me today away from the ground, and from your face I shall be hidden.” – Genesis 4:14. Genesis 4 does not indicate that Cain, an evil man, was allowed to literally see God’s face. So then what did he mean? Some would say (as I know from experience) that it was just a metaphor in which Cain meant God would no longer look at him, but look away from him in shame, and not be kind to him any longer. Cain might have meant that, but at the same time was also indicating that he knew that those who obtained eternal life/peace, would one day see God’s face. Evidence for this is in how Cain made his sentence, he did not say, “You have hidden,” as in “You were showing me kindness and now have withdrawn it” or literally that he saw God’s face or that God was looking at Cain, but then was looking away continually in disgust (over Cain murdering Abel), but said that God in the future would do so. That those with eternal peace (which the Bible in various places teaches only the righteous/those who love God and obey him much) will see God’s face one day, isn’t speculation, but is taught in Psalm 17:15:

“As for me, I shall behold your face in righteousness; when I awake, I shall be satisfied with your likeness.”

Jesus also said, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.” – Matthew 5:8

The next strong evidence that the gospel was known to some very early on, came just 12 verses later, in the same chapter:

“To Seth also, a son was born, and he called his name ‘Enosh’. At that time people began to call upon the name of Yahweh.”

First, “Enosh” means, “Man: frail and miserable”, and whose name also seems to hint at man’s mortality, being that just a few verses before, the subject was on Cain murdering Abel, and Cain’s misery from God’s condemnation upon him and the future punishment that he would endure afterwards. So, when the next sentence says, “At that time people began to call upon the name of Yahweh.”, it implies that the people of this time were doing so, after seeing and hearing about man being truly mortal (knowing that Abel died) and could suffer great misery from doing wrong (as they learned from what happened to Adam, Eve, and Cain and from their own experience when being injured and emotionally hurt from mistreatment from other people and evil angels, as they lived their lives). In other words, man, upon realizing he was mortal, weak (in comparison to God) and while feeling torment, began to call out to God for relief, for help. The second sentence in Genesis 4:26 is similar to this passage in the New Testament, which is referring to how to obtain eternal peace:

“For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” – Romans 10:12-13

And note that the first people, those born while Adam and Eve were still alive, were neither Jews nor Greeks, but were their ancestors.

The 9th evidence:

It is further evidence that the gospel was known before the even the Jews existed (or Greeks):

“It came to pass that hypocrites began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, and the sons of God saw that the daughters of the hypocrites were attractive, and they took as wives whichever of them that they chose to have. Then Yahweh said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” – Genesis 6:1-3

The typical translation of this passage makes it seem like “the sons of God” are angels and that God just decided to let them have sex with humans, because they felt like it, but there is no indication, using my translation, that the perfectly obedient angels just decided to marry humans one day (and I say “perfect” because God implies that the evil angels “left their place” (in other words, basically, disobeyed God) and is why he considered them evil and rejected them, and because he did not reject the other angels and still hasn’t they must not disobey God/are perfectly obedient to him). Rather, as my possible translation shows, those who were saved, “the sons of God” (which John 1:12 indicates is another name for those who are saved), sinned by taking the unsaved (hypocrites) as wives. And I say “sinned”, because in the New Testament, God commands the saved to not marry the unsaved, because they are not compatible morally and will not get along, but also because right after the sons of God are said to marry these hypocrites or “daughters of men” if you insist, God expresses his anger, saying that he’s decided to limit the lifespans of the man to 120 years (yes I know there are people who have lived longer after this decree was made, so he was probably referring to the people alive at that time, or making a general decree that would be true for most, but not all (as is evident from verse 7 in which God clearly made a generalized statement about killing off all man, but then excepts Noah and his family) and other verses expressing God’s disapproval and anger at man in the next verses from 4-7 and 11-13.

The 10th evidence:

Genesis 22:1-22 is an obvious allegory (for us who can look back on it from after the Bible was finished) in which a story is given that is similar to Christ’s sacrificial offering of himself, in which God has Abraham role play, without realizing it, the story of God offering Christ as a sacrificial offering. Abraham said that God would provide a lamb for a sacrifice. In the New Testament, Jesus, whom John the Baptist called, “the lamb of God”, volunteered himself to be sacrificed by God (which God did through evil men).

The 11th evidence:

In Genesis 37:35 it says,

“All his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort [Jacob], but he refused to be comforted and said, ‘No, I shall go down to Sheol to my son, mourning.'”

Jacob indicated that he believe he would still be alive after he died, and would go to a place where he would be in torment (though that surely didn’t happen to Jacob according to Jesus). This obviously shows that some Jews believed that they would still be alive after they died. Of course not all would believe they would end up in Sheol/Hell, and if they believed that Hell was downward, then they would have believed, logically, that a place of peace was upwards, above, in Heaven (of course the sides would be earth, and the Bible doesn’t teach that Jews believed you would go on living by continuing to live as a spirit on Earth).

The 12th evidence: is this passage:

I wait for your salvation, Yahweh. … Joseph is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a spring; his branches run over the wall. The archers bitterly attacked him, shot at him, and harassed him severely, yet his bow remained unmoved; his arms were made agile by the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob (from there is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel), by the God of your father who will help you, by the Almighty who will bless you with blessings of heaven above… Genesis 49:18, 22-25.

The 13th evidence: is this passage:

“Moses returned to Yahweh and said, ‘Alas: this people has sinned a great sin. They have made for themselves gods of gold, but now, if you will forgive their sin–but if not, please blot me out of your book that you have written. But Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Whoever has sinned against me, I will blot out of my book.'” – Exodus 32:31-33

To what book was Moses referring? It wasn’t Exodus, which wasn’t even finished yet. There is also no logical reason as to why Moses would ask to have reference to him in Exodus removed as opposed to simply asking God, “Don’t use me any further, don’t mention me anymore in Exodus, choose someone else”. Again: Why would Moses ask to have history about him erased rather than asking God to simply choose another to continue serving in his place? It makes better sense if Moses was referring to another book which the New Testament mentions, and if Moses was referring to sacrificing himself (and was asking in an indirect way). Philippians 4:3 says,

“Yes, I ask you also, true companion, help these women, who have labored side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.”

Here are verses in Revelation that indicate the Book of Life also has to do with death:

“The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life.” – Revelation 3:5;

“And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. … And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. – Revelation 20:12, 15

And Exodus also says that God spoke with Moses “face to face” like a friend, so surely of all the people to know these things, was Moses. So Moses was asking God to do this, “Remove my name from the Book of Life and punish me in Hell in the place of those who have sinned so that they may have eternal peace and be able to go to Heaven.” when he had asked God to remove/”blot out” his name from the Book of Life and to instead spare those Jews who sinned against God.

The 14th evidence: that the concept of a spiritual Heaven and Hell was at least known to the Jews right away, though wasn’t a sure thing for most of them at the time Solomon had lived (ironically, since God said he was the wisest man (in the flesh) who would ever live (besides Jesus), is this verse:

“Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down into the earth?” – Ecclesiastes 3:21

So, at least in Solomon’s time, there would have been speculation about whether or not Heaven and Hell had physical locations or spiritual ones (spiritual, as in, in some unseen locations figuratively referred to as Heaven/above or Hell/below).

The 15th evidence:

Besides the evidence I have so far given, there is also no evidence that Daniel just made up the concept that by being righteous you could get to Heaven one day, if he did, then why didn’t Lisa say what it was? She had three hours to do so, instead, she babbled and laughed along with Ian’s stupid jokes and replies. Also, Daniel didn’t even teach that you could get to Heaven by being righteous, so she twisted the Bible and in a dangerous way, which misleads people thinking that they could get to Heaven by trying to be good in and of themselves, as Arminians teach.

Lisa also said that she (simply) believes whoever claims they saw Heaven as truly having seen it. Can anyone say, “gullible” and “assuming”?

The 16th evidence:

A caller also pointed out part of this passage in Job, which is an ancient book, which is about Job (a man who some Christians believe lived and died before Moses was born):

For God speaks in one way, and in two, though man does not perceive it. In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep falls on men, while they slumber on their beds, then he opens the ears of men and terrifies them with warnings, that he may turn man aside from his deed and conceal pride from a man; he keeps back his soul from the pit, his life from perishing by the sword. Man is also rebuked with pain on his bed and with continual strife in his bones, so that his life loathes bread, and his appetite the choicest food. His flesh is so wasted away that it cannot be seen, and his bones that were not seen stick out. His soul draws near the pit, and his life to those who bring death. If there be for him an angel, a mediator, one of the thousand, to declare to man what is right for him, and he is merciful to him, and says, ‘Deliver him from going down into the pit; I have found a ransom; let his flesh become fresh with youth; let him return to the days of his youthful vigor’; then man prays to God, and he accepts him; he sees his face with a shout of joy, and he restores to man his righteousness. – Job 33:14-26

Clearly, Lisa is wrong, and in my opinion, didn’t want to have wasted her time on having written a large book for nothing, and wanted to get some return on her efforts, even if she knew it was undeserved. I don’t believe that someone as intelligent as her was unaware that the New Testament taught that certain people in the Old Testament, for example the prophets, knew about Christ and trusted in him as their future savior from Hell, and that the Old Testament contained metaphors of events that would happen which the New Testament also describes or recorded as having been fulfilled (like Christ’s sacrifice). Further, I believe she knew about Calvinism and Arminianism. I believe this in part, not just because of her age and position in life (someone who reads much news, and would have to come across religious topics on Christian fundamentalism), but also because when she looked up something like, “origin of being righteous to enter heaven” or “origin of the teaching that good deeds must be done to get to Heaven” would have seen these two sites in the search results:

Why A Moral Life Won’t Get Us to Heaven

Can you get to heaven by being good? Can you get to heaven by being good?

If she searched for, “Judaism, doctrine, righteousness, heaven”, would have seen:

Olam Ha-Ba: The Afterlife which mentions an evidence I hadn’t thought of, that of the Patriarchs being “gathered to their people” after they died.

Jesus also pointed out that God said he was the God of the Patriarchs who had died, indicating that they were still alive, being that God is not the God of (ruling over) the dead.

Related post: Did an ancient tablet prophecy that virgin birth before even the Gospels did?

A World Full of Hypocrites

Beware of those who say, “Do not judge.”
yet who could care less about the Bible and
hypocritically say, “Do not judge.” whenever
it is convenient for them to dismiss criticism
of their wrongs. Beware of those who say that
all humans are equal (a favorite excuse of
Catholics to excuse themselves of punishment):

Beware of homosexuals, who admit to being liars:

The “10% of adults are gay” myth

A gay celebrity says all gays are liars

Beware of the hypocrisy and insanity of
psychopaths and narcissists, who obsess
on mere appearance, beauty and first
impressions, who favor the charming,
judge books by their covers, ignore
the poor and favor the wealthy:

Beware of those using and prescribing
drugs over right behavior and logic,
repenting and seeking God’s wisdom:
Beware of the hypocrisy of atheists:

Beware of vain bigots, who idolize men
and show contempt for their Maker, and
show contempt for those who exalt Him
above their idols:

Beware of the hypocrisy of Judaics,
who pretend be wise and loving,
who want the money of foreigners,
yet use it oppress the foreigners in
Israel and Christians:

Beware of the hypocrisy of Catholics:

Beware of those who think that they control
their destiny and not God:

Beware of the hypocrisy of false Christians:

Beware of the hypocrisy of those who act like experts,
but show no expertise, beware of deists:


Beware of the hypocrisy of those who say you
must be baptised to be forgiven of your sins:
Beware of Muslims who claim they are good yet who all use
false arguments against why the Bible is inferior or not true.

Beware of Muslims, who claim to have the truth about the
Bible, but are unwilling to tell you what it is, and instead
tell you to go to some other Muslims for answers.

Beware of Muslims who resort to violence, because the
Qur’an commands them to be randomly violent to non-Muslims.

Beware of the Muslims, who only love their children based on the
condition that their children make Mohammed’s word equal to God’s:

Beware of those who believe in karma, because karma justifies
any crime, including crimes against children:

What Buddhists forget, when babbling about Buddha
(his correct sayings):
Believe nothing on the faith of traditions,
even though they have been held in honor
for many generations and in diverse places.
Do not believe a thing because many people speak of it.
Do not believe on the faith of the sages of the past.
Do not believe what you yourself have imagined,
persuading yourself that a god inspires you.
Believe nothing on the sole authority of you

[earthly] masters and priests.
After examination, believe what you yourself have tested
and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto.

Buddhist Extremists in Bangladesh Beat, Take Christians Captive

Sri Lanka bans American rapper Akon for ‘defaming Buddhism’

The Dalai Lama incites violence against theist Buddhists:

The extreme oppression of the Tibetans under the Lamas: The Story of Tibet’s Serfs

Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth

Beware of Buddhists, who lied about
not being superstitious, and who used
Uniformatarianism, Darwinism, and
Psychoanalysis, and other false
sciences, to obtain more power:

Beware of numerology and astrology,
which are false sciences:

Beware of Wiccans,
who claim to to respect
their law, “Do no harm”,
but neglect the harm
that can be inflicted
with words and neglect.:

Beware of neo pagans who claim
to be at one with “nature”, and
to worship “nature”, and to be it’s
protectors, yet neglect man, which is
apart of it.

Beware of the hypocrisy of worshipers of the
false god Random, also known as “Chaos”
(which is really Satan):

“Stop judging by mere appearances
and make a right judgment.”
Yeshua, the King of Heaven

Mentally Ill, Imbecile Savant, Bill Maher, Fails

March 28, 2010 6 comments

Post link:

        The Mentally Ill Imbecile Savant, Bill Maher, Fails

by Daniel Knight

narcissist psychopaths

Bill: Hey Dawkins, I hate fundies. Um, I love evolution though.
Hey, I have gray hair too. Hey Dawkins, I like your cologne.
I bought your books. Maybe you tell can me what’s in them later.
Hey, I have my own show. So, we’re friends now right?

On May 1, 2009, on the Real Time show, paid for by the anti-Christian HBO channel, the narcissist psychopath imbecile and Christian-hater, Bill Maher, whom they paid to host the show, said,

“Since viruses, like swine flu, get to be potentially deadly because they ‘evolved,'”

Bill: Let me know when you’ve seen a virus evolve. Or do you have magical eyes? I don’t believe in magical eyes Bill. Stop trying to convince everyone to be a conniving loony narcissist like yourself. And Bill, grammar check: “because they CAN evolve”: you can’t even think logically when making attacks against theists.

And Bill: you put put “evolved” in quotes, because? Was that an accidental drop of the propaganda ball, in which you forgot to casually imply that every scientist believes in MACRO evolution, and that the “fundies” and “creationists” don’t count as scientists? Or was that to indicate that “evolved” wasn’t really what you meant, and so then the comments about evolution afterwards was deception? Or was it because you don’t want anyone to mistakenly think that you are the one who is the source for what the world might one day realize is a lie? Or was it your lazy version of a reference? Maybe you stop reading Wikipedia so much and and gullibly believing that whatever Jimmy Wales and his anti-social trolls say is a reference, is “truthfully” a reference. Do you know what “truth” means? Hint: It’s not defined by your feelings.

And do you know what “evolved” means? Hint: it’s not what you see when facing a mirror.

“if you don’t believe in evolution and you get it, you have to pray it away.”

And your evidence that those who don’t believe in evolution pray for any injuries they have to go away is? Are you living with Osama Bin Laden? It’s not good to be friends with terrorist idiots who are as wise as the sand they are always staring at. Truly you are a moron to think that unless you believe in evolution that you can’t use medical technology. How can you attack Christians without realizing that among them were doctors? Hint hint: Luke ring a feeble neuron? Hint hint: the father of microbiology was a, hint hint: Calvinist. Hint hint: the father of modern evolutionary theory was, hint hint: NOT the credit thief Darwin.

“You can’t crap all over Darwin and stem cell research”

So everyone who doesn’t believe in evolution is against stem cell research? And your evidence of this is? Do you know what “delusional” and “slander” is? And everyone who is against evolution “craps” on Darwin? Bill, do you know what “childish” means? Do you know how narcissists talk and behave? Hint: like you.

“and global warming and then come crawling back to science”

And your evidence that if someone is against evolution and global warming, they must be against science is? And Bill: the swine flu epidemic warnings as did global warming, clearly, clearly came to nothing, and are known by millions now, Christians and atheists, to have been elitist scams, perpetrated by elitists like you. Do you know what the words, “gullible”, “naive”, “ignoramus”,”simpleton” and “illogical” mean? Hint hint: look in the mirror. So much for your science, Bill. Hint hint: the word science, it don’t mean or “cuz Bill Maher said so” or “cuz Bill Maher’s idols said so” or “mere smug insults and ranting”. Next time, don’t insult or boast about what you are severely ignorant about, and while you are mentally ill.

“when you want Tamiflu”

What person who didn’t believe in your anti-scientific propaganda came crawling back to science for Tamiflu? Just the imaginary people in your head.

And can you show me where “science” is handing out Tamiflu? So science is embodied by anyone or anything which dispenses Tamiflu? Who said atheists had no religion Mr. I Worship Any Vaccine Promoted by the C.D.C., Cuz They Have Nice Suits and Riches. Stop worshiping Mammon, Bill, money isn’t God or anything close to it. If you hadn’t noticed, it’s because of greedy mockers like yourself that the world is filled with poverty and fighting, which you, with nonsensical hypocritcal rants like these, pretend to be against.

And can you show me what scientific research shows that Tamiflu protects against the swine flu, let alone well, and doesn’t harm anyone beyond the needle being stuck into them to deliver it, which opens up a hole in their skin so that it’s open for attack by viruses, Mr. Advanced Safe Scientist Maher?

Have fun injecting yourself with Tamiflu and all your other “safe” vaccines that have ruined the health of and killed millions, while you ignored what was going on in the news you were entrusted with by God to honestly seek out and truthfully tell.

“That’s for us sinners.”

I thought you believed in science?

“A recent Zogby phone poll found that 78% of Americans favor teching evidence for and against Darwin’s theory; 43% also believe the pollster asking the question was in fact a tiny man living insane the phone.”

The only people who would laugh at that joke are people who believe in fact that there is a tiny man in their phone. And is it scientific to insult people because they don’t believe in censoring truth and thinking anything other than smug and mocking thoughts at anyone who disagrees with their feelings and doesn’t laugh at their baseless, childish, funny-to-morons-only jokes?


Oh that’s really cute, clever and original, saying, “folks”. I really believe whatever you say now being so friendly and charming beacause you said, “folks”. Who taught to you be so creative, original, loving and funny, and not cliche?

“there is a lot that isn’t known yet about this swine flu, but there is one thing that we do know: the process that brough us the new flu is called evolution. It’s not rocket science”

Narcissist psychopath: Mind not speaking for the 78% percent you slandered who disagree with you, and mind not speaking for the 60+ million creationists and Christians and everyone else with common sense who doesn’t agree with you, whom you repeatedly slander with mere insults? And no Bill: MICRO evolution isn’t the only process in the universe Mr. Evolution Is Whatever I Say It Is Maher. And Bill, vaccine-makers and their paid partners have brought us more swine flu then swine have, millions more doses. It’s not rocket science: it’s been in the news for a while now. You know what “news” is right Mr. Evolution and Darwin are God, Evolution This, Darwin That, Constantly Associatie Evolution and Darwin With Everything To Push God Out of My Mind and To Bully Christians Into No Longer Glorifying God but Me In His Place for My Original Ranting and Clever Use of the Cliche, “It’s not rocket science”.

According to your dumb, mere insults Bill, neither scientists or respected polling companies should be regarded as either if so long as they don’t agree with whatever you say. That’s not science or rocket science Bill; it’s the bullying of a hypocrite trying to force his anti-truth religion on you.

And from TV Guide’s August, 2009 interview of Bill Maher, published here on Auguest 28, 2009:

TV Guide: “Do you have an election-day ritual? Do you start drinking early?”

Maher: “[Laughs] Depends on who’s winning!”

Bill, calm down, you don’t want to show too much emotion lest you be labeled bi-polar. Bill, I thought religion is for the neurologically impaired? Contradict yourself much? Which is it: all ritual is bad or not?

TV Guide: “Your new documentary Religulous sounds like something all faiths can hate.”

Maher: “They should. I have no problem with spirituality,”

And you think spirituality is? Rocks? Tamiflu? Science? What is it Bill who pretends to know all about religion?

Maher: “even though I don’t know what it means exactly.”

Honestly I didn’t read that after having typed what I did before typing what I did to the previous quote, but thanks for confirming my point with that evidence you’ve produced against youself.

Maher: “I think for some people, it means they read about Kabbalah in US Weekly.”

That’s funny, because? And are you able to do anything other than joke? Are you mentally ill that you can’t be serious for more than about minute? How, if you are never serious about anything, can you anything? You’re not just a narcissist or psychopath, you’re a mocker, a person who is addicted to joking about everything.

Maher: “I have a problem with organized religion,”

Of course a Big Imaginary Random Exploding Magic-Organization+Randomness-Making Bomb from 15 billions of years ago-believing (or is that not the lastest magic number now?), random spontaneous generation of life-believing, random macro-evolution believing, consistent Darwin-worshiping, hates organization. Running wild and walking into trees while ranting in the rain is superior don’t ya know? Not.

All your faith is “Rndom this random that, maybe this maybe that, still learning this still learning that, how dare you claim to know the truth how dare you claim to know that you crazy theist who refuses to believe in my random magic order+randomness-creating gods of the gaps! You who dare to be organized and not disorganized sloppy random morons like my fanatics!”

 Bill, if you hate organized religion so much, then why don’t you go back to being a Catholic, or how about becoming a Unitarian? What’s so organized about those religions other than their rituals and organized attacks on truth? You do know what rituals and organized propaganda is don’t you Mr. Evolved, “Crawl to Get Your Tamiflu and Run From Carbon Dioxide: It’s Poison You Stupid Flat Earth-Believing Theists! Now Worship My Al Gore and Say, ‘Evolution’ and ‘Darwin’ Every Other Word!”? Ok Bill, here, I’ll pander to you just a little: Evolution (peace be upon mim), Darwin (peace be upon mim), is cool, Evolution (peace be upon it), and Darwin (peace be upon him) is reponsible for everything (peace be upon them). Wow: no wonder you and other question-hankerers can’t think straight.

Maher: “which is really organized superstition.”

Because you said so, and whatever the Mad Hatter says is true is true because he said so (sound familiar?) And Bill: didn’t you effectively say, “certainty in one’s religious belief is absurd“? So why are you so certain about your organized Anti-truth-can-be-known Pro-disorganization, (Macro-)evolution, Randomness, Darwin-worship, Theist-mocking, Tree-hugger Religion then?

And remember saying this, Bill?:

“You (Scientologists), like all religious people, have a neurological disorder. And the only reason why people think it’s sane is because so many other people believe the same thing. It’s sanity by consensus.”

Once again blind hypocrite: Big words don’t make you right. And Bill, did you mean “mental disorder”? Why do you not want to use the appropriate terms for the things you’re talking about and instead choose to obsess on and throw out  high catch phrases and by doing so dumb your audience down to your mentally low level? Here is an explanation about what a “neurological disorder” is. Why do you hate intelligence and truth so much? Why do you want everyone to be as dumb as you? Is it so that they won’t see your piles and flood of shameful lies? It’s YOU who assume, you who truth, you who are lazy-minded, you who dumb down the world with your flood of  stupid bullying and insults.

Bill equates preaching against hohomosexual behavior (which is done
to save the lives of those who might or do commit homosexual acts)
to making a death threat to all Jews

Tall, charming Bill thinks that Iran having some token Jews in their government makes them of no concern. That’s like saying that if a male says sexist things about females to gain their acceptance, but has some female friends, or a wife or daughter, and allows them to live or work with him, that that shows he’s not really sexist. It’s thinking like that that perpetuates not just wife-battering and child-abuse, but is the same kind of rhetoric that abuse people use to justify their abuse. They say things like, “But I do a lot of good, I’ve helped a lot of people.” Or, “Well I’ve never murdered” or, “I haven’t committed any big sins.” Bill is naive, just like a child, and a danger to life, since unlike a child, millions heed his corrupt preaching.

Jesus, whom despite what you think, was and is much wiser than you, said, “You hypocrite!: Get the log out of your eye before trying to help your brother get the splinter out of his.”

Arianna Huffington, proudly shows her face on Bill Maher’s propaganda page,
hosted on her news journal, promoting child abuse while claiming to be against it.
To Hell with your random gods of the gaps.

الأحمق لا يجد متعة في الفهم ،
ولكن فقط في فضح قلبه.
الأمثال 18:2

שוטה מוצא שום הנאה בהבנה,
אבל רק בחשיפת לבו.
משלי 18:2



바보 이해에서 기쁨을 발견 안돼
오직 자신의 마음을 노출했다.
잠 18시2분

एक मूर्ख समझने में कोई सुख पाता है,
लेकिन उसके दिल को उजागर करने में.
नीतिवचन 18:2

ابله میبیند هیچ لذت در فهم ،
اما تنها در افشای قلب او بود.
ضربالمثلها 18:2

Un tonto no encuentra placer en la comprensión, la
pero sólo en la exposición de su corazón.
Proverbios 18:2

Un imbécile ne trouve aucun plaisir dans la compréhension,
mais seulement à exposer son cœur.
Proverbes 18:2

Uno sciocco non trova piacere nella comprensione,
ma solo per esporre il suo cuore.
Proverbi 18:2

Дурак не находит удовольствие в понимании,
но только в разоблачении его сердце.
Притчи 18:2

Дурень не знаходить задоволення в розумінні,
але тільки у викритті його серце.
Притчі 18:2

Ένας ανόητος δεν βρίσκει ευχαρίστηση στην κατανόηση,
αλλά μόνο στην αποκάλυψη καρδιά του.
Παροιμίες 18:2

A r finner hakuna raha katika ufahamu,
lakini kuwasababishia tu katika moyo wake.
Mithali 18:2

Die dwaas vind geen behae in verstandigheid nie,
maar net in die blootstelling van sy hart.
Spreuke 18:2

A-aksaya ng panahon hahanap walang kasiyahan sa pag-unawa,
ngunit lamang sa paliwanag ng kanyang puso.
Kawikaan 18:2

Loll leiab mingit rõõmu mõistmist,
vaid paljastamine tema süda.
Õpetussõnad 18:2

A bolond nem tapasztalja, öröm, hogy megértsék,
de csak kiteszik a szíve.
Példabeszédek 18:2

Een dwaas vindt geen plezier in het begrijpen,
maar alleen in zijn hart bloot.
Spreuken 18:2

En dåre finner inget nöje i att förstå,
men bara i att exponera sitt hjärta.
Ordspråksboken 18:2

Et fjols finder ingen glæde ved at forstå,
men kun i at afsløre hans hjerte.
Ordsprogene 18:2

Heimskingi kemst ekki ánægja með að skilja,
en aðeins í útlistun hjarta sínu.
Ok 18:2

Kvailas mano jokio malonumo suprasti,
bet tik atskleisti savo širdyje. Patarlių 18:2

Głupiec nie znajduje przyjemność w zrozumieniu,
ale tylko w odsłaniając jego serca. Przysłów 18:2

A twyllo yn canfod dim pleser yn deall,
ond dim ond yn datgelu ei galon. Diarhebion 18:2

Blázen nenachází zalíbení v porozumění,
ale jen v odhalení jeho srdce.
Přísloví 18:2

Një budalla nuk gjen kënaqësi në mirëkuptim,
por vetëm në vënien në dukje zemrën e tij.
Fjalët e urta 18:2

O insensato non ten pracer no entendemento,
pero só en expoñer o seu corazón.
Proverbios 18:2

Fhaigheann amadán Tá áthas ar bith a thuiscint,
ach amháin i nochtadh a chroí.
Proverbs 18:2

Muļķot nekonstatēja prieks sapratni,
bet tikai pakļauj savā sirdī.
Proverbs 18:2

Yon fou jwenn plezi pa konprann nan,
men sèlman nan kè denonce li.
Pwovèb 18:2

A fool finds no pleasure in understanding,
but only in exposing his heart.
Proverbs 18:2

My Sad Discovery About Alex Jones and Finding On Noory’s Beloved Jordan Maxwell

March 23, 2010 4 comments

About three hours ago, while I was looking through Youtube trying to find a quote in which David Icke said he was the Son of God, and failing despite the many claims that he had said so, and while searching, noticed some clips on Alex Jones, and watched/listened to three. One was about him, and the man talking about him was William Cooper, on his own radio show. William is apparently somewhat famous person it seems among the Westerner “conspiracy” type group. He also seems to be dead.

Cooper, on his show, claimed that Alex had slandered him on the Alex Jones Show, by claiming that he (Cooper) had been kicked off Alex’s show by Alex for using foul language. I heard to callers call into Cooper’s show, and both testified that he hadn’t been kicked off, and that Alex had lied. While listening to the video, I found out from Cooper that Alex had claimed that Russia had launched nuclear missiles at America. However when he said that, Cooper also seemed to lie by claiming that Alex had panicked millions of Americans (but how if Alex was on an obscure radio show and if what he said didn’t spread far because that it was clearly so absurd?). Further, Cooper while ranting against Alex, was using foul language more than once. Also, he didn’t specifically cite what show Alex slandered him and didn’t give any actual quotes as to what the slander was. So until it’s known, Alex merely might have said something like, “I won’t allow Bill on my show because he uses foul language”, which is true if that rebuttal Cooper gave is how he normally speaks. And as many know, “Bad manners corrupt good behavior”, which is a quote from the Bible (though it can be translated in significantly different way).

I had suspected for at least a month, that Alex was a narcissist. I thought this because of something I heard him say, I think last year, and it was on Coast to Coast AM. I think it was the show that was on Alex having, big surprise: lied about an interview with Obama on the 9/11 cover-up. Though whether Alex truly lied or not, who knows. On that show or some other Alex boasted that he had (or felt he had) become the leader against the NWO movement, which was absurd being that there are many people against the NWO or it’s formation, mainly, Christian pastors all over the world, some of whom have thousands of members in their church. Though Alex no doubt had in mind a military-type leader, or type whose main focus was on the NWO, but even then it’s still a stretch being that Christian pastors often, as a group, and using websites, warn about the coming reformation of the Roman Empire, or something about as bad about it. If Alex meant as a secular military leader, in that way I would say he is right, IF he was not someone who preached against Satan and who endorsed the Bible, and he does both, so then he is a spiritual leader, and as that, he is not a secular leader. As a preacher against Satan, he would repel a lot of atheists. He also has many Christian callers on his show, who sometimes read from the Bible, which in general he shows a good attitude towards, though sometimes gives an impure attitude, for example while writing this sentence, he had a Christian caller who after reading a verse that “called for calm”, Alex replied, “But wait: God said that if your house is on fire to get your butt our of the house,” and then with a laugh said, “I’m not sure which verse that is” (this was in a repeat of the fourth hour of his show today), so he would be even more unlikely to have atheists and agnostics / a secular group, following him.

After picking up on some bizarre very careless lies that he had made on his show, one concerning The Book of Revelation and another on a video on Youtube posted by Mark Dice (which I talked about here or Twitter), and about a month ago (I think about a month ago), noticing that all the non-video still pictures he had of himself on his homepages of and only showed one side of his face, and with him in a vain looking position (his right arm held up vainly), and strangely, they were all the same picture. On other websites like in Facebook he shows other pictures.

After the listening to Cooper’s hateful (and annoying-voiced) rebuttal, I listened to a very old radio broadcast by Alex supposedly, which claimed that he had lied about Russia firing nukes at the U.S.. At first I felt a little that it could be a hoax, since the person speaking didn’t sound much like Alex, but for obvious reasons I then realized that it was him, and one I just realized while typing this sentence: would have sued to get the video off Youtube if it weren’t true being that someone surely brought the recording up to him after hearing it on Youtube (it had over 20,000 views). It was that video, combined with everything else, that persuaded me to completely believe that Alex suffers from narcissism personality disorder.

 It’s of great concern to learn that Alex is very unstable and mentally ill, because I was, and am happy that he is giving out much correct information that is helping people to see the evil around them and helping them not to participate in it, but to reject it. But if the many false Christians that follow him as if he were God or God’s Son, realize what kind of person Alex really is, it may destroy their faith in the true God, and they may become permanently cynical and never correct their beliefs and be saved. Even temporary cyncism can wreck or greatly hinder a person’s life, their own and/or others. Alex’s disorder also puts him at a horrible disadvantage to becoming saved, being that he is prone to telling some outrageous lie and destroying his reputation and as a result he may stray farther from the Bible and end up destroying himself.

But, if Alex is a narcissist, how can his talking to “non-special” guests be explained, being that narcissts are very resistant to associating with them? I suspect, though didn’t mention yet on my exposition on narcissism, that narcissists will consider anyone special those who make themselves unique/special by giving special attention to the narcissist, especially flattering attention. Such attention also helps a narcissist to validate his exaggeratededly “good” self-image.

Another problem with identifying Alex as a narcissist seems, to me, his high tendency for telling the truth. However, as I pointed out at, narcissists are able to specialize in a narrow field and there are different degrees of narcissism. Also, it may be that Alex’s narcissism is at least in part, being strengthened by demons, and that God has lessened their grip on him, or at least at times, so that Alex can think more clearly, well enough that it’s hard to tell that he is mentally ill. It’s also hard to tell that he is a narcissist because he has plenty of genuine ammunition now that the world has become highly corrupt and news of obvious and incredibly bad deeds is everywhere, and Alex is getting much attention, and so the temptation for him to make up outrageous things for attention is very low.

Another problem with identifying Alex as a narcissism is what might seem to some people to be a genuine love of “commoners” as Alex referred to the middle class and poor when he had on G. Edward Griffin(?) a few days ago, and demonizing the elitists who persecuted them (whch G. Edward Griffin wouldn’t particpate in doing when Alex encouraged him to at that moment). However, remember that Alex referred to himself as the leader of the NWO, and so would see the middle class and poor that followed him as special (and Alex knows that he is at least as popular as Rush Limbaugh now and so would have a large following of middle class and poor persons). However, Alex’s love for them could be seen as not genuine, being that he treats the Bible sloppily and in by doing so, disrespects what he knows is a large following of Christians. Further, he insults those who support the Democrats (which is mainly liberals, and is about half the country) and for not listening to him, which further shows that his love is biased and only given to those who agree with his main beliefs (that the richest bankers rule the world and are evil thieves intent on killing off Christians, reducing the population to a few dozen or hundred million, making slaves of them and sex slaves of their children, and that it doesn’t matter what your religion is). Alex also noteably will not refer to anyone as a liberal, and in all the times I’ve listened to him hasn’t mentioned homosexuality, attempted sex change, let alone whether either is right or wrong or lead to bad behavior, showing, in the context of everything else he does, that he is not truly concerned about right from wrong, but getting followers and gaining power. Deviant sexual behavior is a major problem in this world, and Alex knows rape and molestation of children is a major problem, so he has little excuse for not speaking out against homosexuality, being that it is a source of great fighting and can easily learn from the Bible that it is wrong and corrupts others to act in a way that is opposite of your physical gender.

After I learned about Alex’s outrageous fear-mongering, I learned something bizarre about an obvious narcissist guest that George Noory sometimes interviews on Coast to Coast AM, a seemingly paranoid guest, named Jordan Maxwell. I learned that this “William Cooper” (the same UFO “kook” Bill Cooper?) would plagiarise Jordan Maxwell, and that Jordan Maxwell, despite implying that he is pro-Christian or against the NWO, is actually pro-NWO. That makes sense being that he would say to George that he is not as couragous as him and dare not speak out against the NWO and that they (the NWO) would say to him (Jordan): “You better watch your mouth” to which Jordan would imply he would heed. I wasn’t planning on writing about Jordan, though I thought about it, since I thought it would be apparent to most people that he was a paranoid narcissist or just a silly liar at least. But apparently Maxwell has significant following, and being that he is a subversive person, a schemer, I thought it could to let his followers and those he might potentially influence in a negative way, know about his hidden motive: to subtley destroy (true) Christianity by glorifying the NWO (which he does by glorifying their use of symbols with hidden meanings and making their power appear to be invincible). More ironic is that George Noory is a quasi-Christian, and wouldn’t support the destruction of all Christianity (except Reformed Christianity – Coast to Coast AM hates “fundamentalists”).

6:19 A.M.: I found these videos a few minutes ago, after typing in “Alex Jones” and “narcissist” into Google: I don’t approve of the crude insults from Alex or the blogger, and though I knew Alex was mentally ill, it hurt to see how mentally ill he was in those videos. I really hope he can still be saved.

6:21: I remembered a few minutes ago that when I was downloading Alex’s shows through torrents last month or two months ago, that one mp3 torrent on him which said that he had “sand bagged” his own supporters, but I thought it was probably just ranting, but after watching those videos at blogcritics, and though I haven’t listened to it yet, it looks like it will turn out to be true.

6:34: It seems that narcissism has become an epidemic due to the strong rejection of God and Satan constantly persuading everyone to obsess on their appearance, their heart as good and beliefs as sacred. There is a book about it which I learned of last year, but have neighther bought nor read.


Ten personality disorders, grouped into 3 clusters, are defined in the DSM-IV:

• Cluster A — Odd or eccentric behavior.


◦ Paranoid personality disorder
◦ Schizoid personality disorder

• Cluster B — Dramatic, emotional or erratic behavior.


◦ Antisocial personality disorder
◦ Borderline personality disorder
◦ Histrionic personality disorder
◦ Narcissistic personality disorder

• Cluster C — Anxious fearful behavior.


◦ Avoidant personality disorder
◦ Dependent personality disorder
◦ Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder

9:08 P.M.:

It just occurred to me that a demon may enter a person due to their poor upbringing, in which their moral training was neglected and/or in which they were trained to have bad morals and to think illogically. What better person to enter into and how much easier to enter and influence?

9:22 P.M.:

I found that picture of Alex yesterday on Youtube, repeated in a video. I wasn’t thinking about demons when I saw that video, but just that it was an incredibly ugly face. But then about an hour ago I read this comment from Zeno (I put it below the picture):

“His face is suddenly deprived of colour, his body rises up of itself,
the eyes in madness roll in their sockets and squint horribly,
the teeth, covered with a horrible foam, grind between blue-white lips;
and limbs twisted in all directions are given over to trembling;
he sighs, he weeps; he fears the appointed day of Judgment
and complains that he is driven out; he confesses his sex,
the time and place he entered into man…” –
Zeno of Verona, recorded in Sargant, page 47, 1973.

The “squinting eyes” reminded me of that picture, and of an effeminte Catholic who gave me a lot of help, but not for long, in Reston, Virginia. His name is Kurt Civri, or was (I don’t know if he’s dead). He told me that he and a friend had once been possessed by the same demon while they were in a car together and it caused them to fight. He also told me that each night he would become possessed by multiple demons and that it would exhaust him. One day I went into McDonalds and saw him as I entered (he would usually go to in the morning to eat), and he was sitting facing the entrance side, near the entrance, looking straight ahead. His eyes were bright pink-red around, and had become smaller-than-normal and shriveled, and they looked demonic to me. It shocked and frightened me so much that I pretended not to notice him as I walked past him and showed no sign of having seen me and he didn’t move at all, but sat back, and for lack of better words, looked possessed. I don’t know how esle to explain it at the moment, except as if he was fixed in some beaten-down-minded state, like a demon that had become insane from having been worn down from sorrow over thousands of years.

11 P.M.:

Someone on Youtube noted in one of Alex’s shows a strangely out of place laugh: that Alex made (but he he could have been laughing over his realization of the outrageous absurdity of the situation he was talking about, but the laugh itself sounds inappropriate, not seemingly just out-of-place). I also noticed near the end of the video Alex throwing a tantrum like a child (I usually only listen to him on audio, rarely watch his videos, so it was a shock to seem him acting that way). The video is racist and poorly edited and annoying to watch and contains foul language from Alex, provoked by a racist moron (I’ve been to his website and it’s amatuer, nonsensical and racist). I read (I think last week), that narcissists are like children who haven’t grown up, and if that is true, his tantrums help confirm that he has NPD.

When an unclean spirit comes out of a man,
it goes through arid places seeking rest
and does not find it. Then it says,
‘I will return to the house I left.’
When it arrives, it finds the house
swept clean and put in order. Then
it goes and takes seven other spirits
more wicked than itself, and they go
in and live there.
And the final condition of that man
is worse than the first.
Luke 11:23-27

11:43 P.M.:

Narcissists are basically children, and they manipulate other people by making them react like children. A Narcissist will try to charm you, scare you or use whatever works to get his or her way. They have never grown up, so their ethics and emotions are childlike. If you deal with them you will soon find out they like to ‘play’. At first this can appear amusing, until you discover that they are serious – they seek revenge for any slight, spreading rumors and lies about people they don’t like (usually someone who has stood up to them, thwarting their childish ambitions). The greatest danger they pose is they want to bring everyone down to their level – they do this by manipulating the child in all of us. If they can push our buttons, get us going, convince people of their sincerity and goodness, then people will think good is bad, and bad is good. Narcissists hate maturity, they hate adults, they hate anyone who thinks (differently from them). Yes, they are hypocrites. They lie, cheat and steal – all the while putting up a front of being good and perfect. They are not intelligent per se, but they are cunning, and they will get their way if we let them. Like the bad apple that spoils the barrel, a Narcissist will slowly spread their disease to others, destroying lives, and wrecking havoc. – S.M.

After pondering that entry for a while (it’s not the same entry as the other I previously mentioned I had read which described narcissists as being like children), I was reminded of how a psychopath-narcissist I knew, even at 21, allowed his mother to dominate him, and it was obvious from listening to him talk to her on his cellphone, and him almost always doing what she wanted, even allowing her to decide who he should have as friends or not (he claimed that she hated me, and apparently for not appearing rich). I wonder what Alex’s relationship with his mother was like — from how he’s turned out, it must have been terrible for him.

Ian Punnett Doesn’t Care If He Goes to Hell and Bart Ehrman Is a Refuted Childish Moron

On Coast to Coast AM this morning a woman called in to point out why Bart Ehrman (a Judas whom Ian stupidly let on the show to babble dumbness against God) was wrong to say that there was more than one god on in the Bible. According to the woman, Bart justified himself by saying that the Bible said there was more than one God when it said, “You shall have no other gods before me.” Yes: Bart has resorted to childish mockery and logomachy (arguing over semantics and synonyms, which the Bible forbids and which anyone is despised for doing). And that is why I couldn’t bear to listen to a single word he said when he was a guest on Coast to Coast AM.

A person (maybe me) once asked atheists a hypothetical question about God if he exist, and one of the atheists was so childish, bitter and stupid, that he merely replied with a conniving simple answer like, “But God exist.” Anyone with average intelligence and decent morals realizes the demon-like hate in such an answer. And imagine how atheists would react if they asked Christians, “if evolution were true would you still believe in God” and they replied, “But there is no such thing as evolution.” The atheists would be extremely annoyed and appalled, yet that is the very kind of stupidity and hate Bart is teaching the world, and Ian Punnett helped that demon.

Ian also said that he didn’t believe that evolution and the Bible were in contradiction, and used the old stupid argument that the Bible isn’t a science text book. Well stupid Ian, neither is the Darwinian Pilfered Theory of Evolution, neither is the Origin of the Species, a religious text book, so what is your point? A thing doesn’t need to be about science to refute a false scientific claim or to confirm a truly scientific claim. And no Ian, the Bible doesn’t say anywhere that billions of years past and that Adam and Eve descended from monkeys, bacteria or randomness or the Big Foul Explosion: it says that God made Adam within a day, not a billion days, not a trillion days and not a thousand years.

Again, using stupid Bart’s stupid “logic”, he would argue that I’m implying that God created Adam in a zillion days because I didn’t specifically mention “zillion”. That is how grossly, sickeningly dumb and/or evil Bart Ehrman is.

Besides that, Ehrman is ignoring the rest of the Bible, two verses, one in the Old and one on the New Testament, which make clear that there are no other gods. God also repeatedly said in the Old Testament that the gods people worshiped were merely LIFELESS idols. So how is Bart a scholar when he ignores what is common sense to millions of children who’ve get the obvious after being in church for a few months? Yet moron Ian calmly and smugly argued with the caller in his ignorance, that the verse could mean either. To my disgust the caller praised him for not making her feel stupid. More disgusting was when the next caller praised Ian for his insights into the Bible which the caller claimed was due to Ian’s seminary training. Uh: What insights gullible caller? So saying, “Well Bart the demon might be right that God was saying other gods existed but that he wanted to be the top god” is “insight”? And how does the caller know that this stupid “insight” is due to Ian’s seminary training being that Ian doesn’t say what he learned from it? What sickening evil and dumbness. So how is Ian a Christian when he deny’s the utter obvious, and isn’t sure if God is the only God and denies the power of God?

The Bible has a prophecy about false Christians like Ian:

mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them. They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires – 2 Timothy 3:1-6

And about two weeks ago, I made a post in this journal about a show in which a seemingly Christian caller tried to show Ian that he wasn’t saved. What I didn’t mention, but thought about many times, was that Ian had boasted to the caller, “I’m very good at lying.” And last year, I wrote how Ian made a ridiculous claim that the King James Bible was a poor translation and not literal, something which he could have easily found out was wrong from the atheist dominated Wikipedia, atheist which hate Christianity. Why doesn’t Ian, a supposed Christian and ordained minister, have the basic knowledge of millions of Christians, or the atheists of Wikipedia, the worlds most people Internet encyclopedia, read by millions ever day?

I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough. But I do not think I am in the least inferior to those “super-apostles.” I may not be a trained speaker, but I do have knowledge. We have made this perfectly clear to you in every way. Was it a sin for me to lower myself in order to elevate you by preaching the gospel of God to you free of charge? … I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve. – 2 Corinthians 11:3-15