On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 17:39:31 +0000 (UTC)
jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
>  From: John Newman <jnn@synfin.org>
> > On Oct 21, 2017, at 6:03 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >    https://jimbellproject.org/press-release-hackers-congress-paralel-polis-oct-7-2017/
> >
> >>    " North Korea, Venezuela, Syria, and Zimbabwe"
> >
> >>    "The leaders of these nations must be stopped immediately, by
> >>    any means necessary, before they kill more."
> >
> >>    Who are these 'leaders' killing, exactly?
> >
>> >>    And why did you forget to mention that the number one guy in
>> >>    the death prediction  market should be the US president, trump?
>
>
>> >To be fair, Jim did give the rest of the world a mention, directly
> after the bit you quoted:
>
>> >“But this is only the beginning because most other nations are
>> also grossly abusive of people's rights.”
>
>
>> It is interesting that Juan was sufficiently dishonest that he would
>> selectively quote my citation of four of the worst nations,

>    LMAO!!! You keep parroting US military propaganda? 

You are delusional.  You mistake correlation for causation.  There is another strong association between the nations of North Korea, Venezuela, Syria, and Zimbabwe:  they are all quite prominent in the news, which is primarily a product of the MSM (news media).  There are, of course, many problems with many nations around the world, see   https://freedomhouse.org/   , but the large majority of them aren't very well publicized by the MSM, especially that of America.  There might be a weak association between the most prominent of these freedom-challenged nation, and what you call "US military propaganda", but they are the same thing.   I have a good reason to mention nations that Western audiences would recognize and understand.  

Good reasons to mention these nations:

1.  North Korea, has the hydrogen bomb, is developing ICBMS.  No logical reason not to mention them.

2.  Venezuela:  Currently they are starving their population, despite sitting atop a lake of oil.  

3.  Syria:  Poisoning their population with chemical warfare agents, a very prominent war, ISIS terrorists, Russian involvement.

4.  Zimbabwe:  Failed state, starving population.

I'd say the burden is on you to show why it would be somehow improper for me to list those nations.   You are free to add more.

>    Also, I provided a link to the source, so there isn't anything
    'dishonest' about what I did. I simply highlighted your fascist
    propaganda which you tried to tone down with a qualfier. But the
    qualfier doesn't change, at all, the fact that you said : 

My goal was an is to convince the public that there is very good reason to consider overthrowing numerous nations' governments.  Merely adding to the list doesn't disprove my point.  If anything, it proves it.  

>>    “The examples of nations such as North Korea, Venezuela, Syria,
    and Zimbabwe prove that some nations of are simply rogue"


>    So which nations are NOT 'rogue' Jim?

That's hard to say.  As an anarchist I am not 'friends' with any nation's government.

> And why mention Zimbabwe
>    and the USA?

I mention Zimbabwe because it is obviously a failed state.  Hyperinflation, for example, and a government which tolerates theft of property from members of the public, as well as murder.  

Why mention the USA?  My problems with the government of the US are well known, especially here.  



>    Where's the evidence that the 4 countries, taken from the
    current list of the 'enemies' of the US nazis, are the 'worst
    nations'?

Did I claim they are 'worst nations'?   I don't recall that.  They are, instead, very prominent and well-publicized examples of nations whose governments need to be  rapidly removed.    Their names and offenses are well known by the public.



>> while
>> omitting the material you pointed out, and yet criticizing me as if I

> had not mentioned it.  In any case, Juan's criticism is foolish:
> From the very beginning (1995) I repeatedly pointed out that one of
> the big advantages of AP is that it won't have some sort of
> centralized agenda: 


>    So why did you list as 'rogue' nations the countries that the
>    american nazis want to invade and destroy?  Does your knowledge
>    of politics come from fauxnews and the washington post? 

Are you implying that "the american nazis ONLY want to "invade and destroy" those specific four countries?!?  THAT would really be an amazing coincidence.   Ha ha!  You set your own trap!!

 Rather, I named failed nations that are causing trouble, either for others or for their own people, or both.   That they are also not popular with, say, the American government isn't necessarily a matter of causation, rather it is a matter of correlation.    No doubt if there were 2 or 3 other highly prominent nations with internal or external problems, you'd claim that "the american nazis  want to invade and destroy" them, too.    



>> Neither _I_ (nor anyone else) won't be the one
>> to control it.  HE may think that the main target should be "X",
>> while I think the main target should be "Y", etc.


>    Yes but the point at hand is the targets YOU mentioned. 

And I mentioned that there are many other problem nations.  I don't think you are successfully faulting me for naming four quite-valid targets; YOU are the one who started by misrepresenting what I said, falsely suggesting that I was only referring to four specific nations.  That's very dishonest argumentation.  I could easily have listed a dozen more, but NOT mentioning those dozen more isn't a fatal flaw to my argument.  



>> Neither needs to
>> be "right", neither needs to be "wrong".    Both targets get taken
>> out if they are considered worthy by the public.  (If people donate,
>> a target will ultimately go.)I didn't mention over 7 billion people.
>> Of what significance is that?  Juan is obviously very self-centered.  


>    How am I self-centered when I am asking YOU about YOUR pick of