To Rebel of Oz on defamation of Jim Stone
Piotr Bein 22.10.2013
In Analysis of the Andrew MacGregor vs. Jim Stone affair you continue bashing Jim Stone. Please list the evidence, the basis of charges against Jim Stone. Andrew MacGregor has admitted to Deanna Spignola he can only furnish circumstantial evidence. But you keep on pounding Jim, adding your conjectures that Jim appeared out of nowhere and successfully redirected Fuku debate from HAARP attack to Israeli mini-nukes. By what acrobatic logic does his refusal to join a video conference on demand by the slanderers validates your and MacGregor’s libel.
In our civilisation, the accuser has to prove. Your sense of justice has been Judaized: guilty until proven innocent… On that basis you demand a Skype session from Jim?! I would not like to appear on Skype because some crazies (?) want me to. The stress situation created suffices to turn one off. Who wants to publically appear to prove that one is not a camel? Every gesture, slip of tongue, blinking of eye and narrowing of pupil would be fitted into preconceived ideas. And if I came out perfect, they would say : “See! A well trained spook, surely Mossad.” Those unable to debunk MacGregor’s “evidence” are fixated already and I doubt a Skype session would throw a light for those unable to debunk his “circumstantial evidence”.
Haven’t you “appeared suddenly” 8 yrs ago? What success has Jim had with his theory of nukes at Fuku if most people still don’t even know what Stuxnet is?! The Judeo-cabal controls both HAARP and nukes or whatever weapon was used (MacGregor’s distinction USA – Israel is infantile).
Jim contributed thru: (1) scientifically debunking the earthquake/tsunami hasbara, (2) documenting Israeli connection to Stuxnet use at Fuku, and (3) professionally proving that tsunami flooding could not lead to a total NPP failure. To me, the issue of how Unit 4 was destroyed is secondary. It was a sabotage: by a nuke, or by Stuxnet and consequent explosion of spent fuel pool No. 4. Debating one way or the other is red herring in the big pic – like in 9/11… “Soldiers” in US uniforms or Israeli security agency – same Zio scum.
Your article (praised by some commenters, I don’t know why), is poor logic, irrelevant and incomplete analysis, and conjecture, ending with a baseless re-assertion of initial thesis. The charges against Jim Stone are so empty that no self-respecting person would answer.
The article reflects your activist and historical ineptitude. Does not the Rebel of Oz know that tactics used by our rulers include faking one or more of the 6 topics listed, to infiltrate and control a group? This is common in e.g. Polish patriotic movements, where the easiest way in is to be openly anti-Semitic (or Russophobic), which evokes trust of the sheeple.
Rebel of Oz uses, knowingly or not, a similar tactics, by posting garbage (recently several anti-Polish, ahistorical hasbara pieces), or writing mindlessly antisemitic, e.g. the phrase “Jewish community” in the article. The group is so diversified (albeit easily indoctrinated by the Talmudic terror rabbinate and its secular version — the Zionists) that it’s plain silly to generalize on all Jews. In WW2, millions of Orthodox and assimilated Jews (both anti-Zio) paid with their lives for opposing Zio plans. Like his idol John Kaminsky, Rebel of Oz does not acknowledge historical facts they reject for unknown reason, nor that Slavs have been the most numerous victim and that Shoah is neither the largest nor an exceptional subgroup of the Holocaust by the Zio-Nazis on more than 20 groups.
You are like MacGregor: out of “intuition” (as you call his wild guess) and speculation, you adhere to a version. But it does not mean that it’s true. Here is the “other” truth on the Holocaust:
These papers remain unpublished on The Rebel… And you preach objectivity and openness?
You say that Jim “never touched on the Holocaust hoax or all the lies that we have been told about Hitler, National Socialism and World War II, which could be simply a case of lack of expertise, but it certainly is a red flag telling me to not fully trust that man…”
In the beginning, however, you say that you test if someone works for the Jews by how much he touches on any of the 6 topics (btw, your list is incomplete, e.g. poisoning the souls by perverting religions of the world). I don’t expect every author opposed to Jew World Order to write/post anti-J round the clock, like The Rebel does. Perhaps Jim does not have the required expertise and leaves the topics to professional researchers like Bollyn, Bjerknes, Estulin… You post 24/7, but include hasbara on Polish-German relations, for example. Does it make you anti-J or pro-ADL?
Who are you to judge history texts? You post s.c. revisionist historical texts, effectively anti-Polish hasbara, on how peace-loving Hitler was and how good death camps were for the health of the vacationers. The Zio-Nazis murdered millions of Poles. The Zio-Nazis were not the only murderers and certainly not worse at genocide than the Judeo-Soviets or the Judeo-Communists in post WW2 Poland. But if you must serve German hasbara, why call The Rebel a Home of the Global Resistance? If Australia is too far down under, better leave the topics alone…
I find it suspicious that s.c. Holocaust deniers, supposedly inquisitive folks, don’t say the Nazis were a Jewish Zionist regime, who murdered the tribe’s anti-Zionists. It’s like an ADL-programmed distraction that keeps the most uncomfortable truth out, while whipping up “antisemitism” chutzpah – both desirable outcomes for the Judeo-cabal.
Holocaust revisionism – yes! Holocaust denial – no! because it trashes the memory of the other victim groups, incl. my compatriots Poles, and my race – Slavs.
Another illustration that proves your test for zio-agents wrong: Dan Fahey, an agent provocateur in anti-uranium weapons movement, gained truthers’ trust over the first few years, by exposing the harm in an exemplary way. Then he tried to steer the movement away from charging the perpetrators. Once he was uncovered, another group popped up, campaigning for uranium weapons ban. It sounded good to sheeple, but was a diversion, as int’l law has banned the weapons years earlier. Details on the intrigues and methods against uranium weapon truthers: http://piotrbein.net/2010/01/05/dirty-uranium-weapons-cover-ups/