jimbellproject.org is looking for volunteers

[Marina Brown]

On 10/22/2017 09:31 PM, jim bell wrote:
> 
> 
> *From:* juan <juan.g71 at gmail.com>
> 
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 17:39:31 +0000 (UTC)
> jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com <mailto:jdb10987 at yahoo.com>> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>>  From: John Newman <jnn at synfin.org <mailto:jnn at synfin.org>>
>> > On Oct 21, 2017, at 6:03 PM, juan <juan.g71 at gmail.com
> <mailto:juan.g71 at 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 
>     targets? 
> 
> 
> 
> Because you are deliberately misrepresenting my characterization of
> those targets.  Suggesting that I was indicating that they were
> exclusive, rather than inclusive of many others.   (Had I listed every
> nation that I thought was actually a problem, I would have been listing
> over 190 nations.  You cannot fault me for listing a few prominent ones,
> unless I stated or implied they were the only problems.  Not only did I
> not do that, I specifically mentioned otherwise.  )
> 
> 
>                       Jim Bell
> 

Kind of surprised you listed Venezuela and not places like Myanmar,
Saudi Arabia or even Kazahkstan and Uzbekistan. VZ is a mess but as far
as human rights horrors it hardly even ranks near the ones i mentioned.

It is, however disliked by the US government for messing up the flow of
oil where Saudi Arabia is a great friend while torturing and killing
opponents of the corrupt regime.

--- Marina