Maybe AF should reply to this?

239 posts / 0 new
Last post
Auld-bod's picture
Auld-bod
Offline
Joined: 9-07-11
Jul 9 2011 14:11

It’s possible you found me patronising, I possibly can be. The reason I stated the obvious regarding carrying a knife, was I understood that it had been implied, that if living in a dangerous area it was a good idea, when out clubbing, to carry this protection.

Since you would appear to know more about the entire situation, I can only bow to your superior knowledge.

It is unfortunate that you find my manner of expression too fancy; this is possibly due to an occasion in my youth when I was roundly ridiculed by an elderly worker for using a four letter word at a union meeting. On that occasion I too felt patronised.

To Andy
I understand to be a troll is a bad thing. You give no reason for this though presumably you disagree with my comments. Presumably they are symptomatic of this phenomenon, if so - too bad.

The reason I joined lib.com was I wished to contribute, if however I am contravening some protocol I will presumably be told.

rata
Offline
Joined: 26-09-06
Jul 9 2011 16:27
anarchistsolidarity wrote:
He did not want to make a martyr out of right winger, he rushed to stop the racist attack happening and saved lifes of two Roma boys who with no doubt would be either killed or seriously hurt. In my books that makes him deserving my total support.
And as for "presumpteous" statements made by people living in relative comfort etc etc.- as someone who is from Eastern Europe himself, having spent 15 years in the frontline struggle against nazis there, having friends killed, hurt, imprisoned because of the nazis I feel quite entitled to make statements- FAB are bunch of cowards, openly admitting their friendship with a racist thug and them being "neearer" events doesnt change that fact, so fuck them and fuck anybody who defends their despicable actions re: Jock.

I don't know who you are, nor which EE country you are from, but it is clear that you are not from Bulgaria, or you wouldn't be calling FAB people cowards. I know many of them for a very long period of time, and even if I can question some aspects of their politics, one thing is clear - these people are not cowards. The only reason they did what they did, if they did it, is because they believed it was right thing to do.

I didn't have the time to inform myself more about this case, and I am right now in process of gathering info, including some from FAB people I know. I have to say that I am by definition skeptical about British soldiers in the Balkans and their good intentions. I am not saying that this one didn't do what anarchistsolidarity is saying, but I will also wait for the other side of the story.

anarchistsolidarity
Offline
Joined: 27-06-11
Jul 9 2011 18:41

they are cowards for refusing to take a stand against racist thugs and as to their reasons for slagging Jock off and being frends with a racist scumbag- they might have some but frankly I couldn't give a fuck less what are they, this is disgrace, full stop.
You can be sceptical all you want, but the FACT is that Jock is doing 20 years for stopping racist attack.

And there is no "if they did it"- its all on their wesbite- unless of course they don't have any influence on what goes in there and that just means they are a joke and a bad one.

Serge Forward's picture
Serge Forward
Offline
Joined: 14-01-04
Jul 9 2011 22:22

I love it when people write "FACT" in capitals, as if this somehow makes it a fact.

anarchistsolidarity
Offline
Joined: 27-06-11
Jul 10 2011 01:23

any constructive comments maybe?

Serge Forward's picture
Serge Forward
Offline
Joined: 14-01-04
Jul 10 2011 10:07
anarchistsolidarity wrote:
any constructive comments maybe?

I see that's something you're quite good at fella. You're also very good at tantrums. Ah, I get it... you are Verucca Salt and I claim my free Wonka bar!

As I said earlier, you've gone about doing this all wrong. You've slagged the fuck out of the AF and anybody else who thinks this matter should be properly looked into, rather than simply done as you say, taken it at face value and issued statements that would be not only be based solely on your say so but completely unaccountable to their respective organisations. And now you state publically that the FAB are a bunch of cowards FACT. To be honest, I don't really think you're cut out for this rallying support for prisoners malarkey because, more than anything, you seem to excel at alienating the shit out of any potential support for your cause.

I will personally use my little voice within the AF to advise that we give you and your organisation a big fucking swerve in future (unless they have the wit to give you the big E and get someone a bit less mental to do the whole communication thing).

@ndy's picture
@ndy
Offline
Joined: 17-03-06
Jul 10 2011 10:12

@Auld-bod: admin: somebody's joining date is irrelevant . The q re the knife is a red herring, which has been addressed many times previously. I suggest you familiarise yrself w the case before commenting further.

@ndy's picture
@ndy
Offline
Joined: 17-03-06
Jul 10 2011 10:28
Serge Forward wrote:
I will personally use my little voice within the AF to advise that we give you and your organisation a big fucking swerve in future...

Whatever the failings of anarchistsolidarity's approach may be (or that of his/her organisation), I hope that AF will judge Jock Palfreeman's case on its own merits.

Serge Forward's picture
Serge Forward
Offline
Joined: 14-01-04
Jul 10 2011 10:21
@ndy wrote:
Whatever the failings of anarchistsolidarity's approach may be (or that of his organisation), I hope that AF will judge Jock Palfreeman's case on its own merits.

I couldn't agree with you more @ndy. And I am sure that is what the AF are trying to do.

anarchistsolidarity
Offline
Joined: 27-06-11
Jul 10 2011 11:51

Sarge- you persistently ignore half of the points in my posts and twist the meaning of others.
I said FACT about Jock stopping racist attack- it has been proved by independent witnesses and even by the racists thugs themselves admitting to it on many occassion (including their initial statements).

Anyway, I didn't notice slagging the fuck out of AF, I am merely pointing at lack of reaction to a problem and amazingly long time it has taken AF to respond to it (in the course of this discussion it came to light that actually some people in AF had that problem pointed out to them years ago. Looks like it is not allowed to criticise AF as it is considered uncomradely and "slagging the fuck" out of it.

In the same fashion you are already advocating "giving my organisation wide berth" because you don't like my posts and they way I do things. Nice one- its the same as if I would say "I spoke with this guy from AF, he was a total wanker. Stay clear of that group, they are fucking useless".
I also suggest that you stop with insulting and personal remarks, because so far I havent made any against you.

As I said before, waiting for AFs move on that matter. Only statement or message we were expecting was to get a clear answer that the problem is indeed looked into and how is it looked into- was it that difficult?

rat's picture
rat
Offline
Joined: 16-10-03
Jul 11 2011 10:53

This is essential reading for anyone genuinely interested in Palfreeman’s situation:

Professor Dave Barclay, Forensics Expert - Interview Transcript.
http://www.abc.net.au/austory/content/2011/s3248774.htm

Auld-bod's picture
Auld-bod
Offline
Joined: 9-07-11
Jul 11 2011 11:19

Prof. Barclay's interview rings true to me. Very well argued.

anarchistsolidarity
Offline
Joined: 27-06-11
Jul 11 2011 23:09

AS statement had just been endorsed by Brighton Anarchist Black Cross as well.

rat's picture
rat
Offline
Joined: 16-10-03
Jul 12 2011 09:43

Brighton ABC has a link to the Freejock website. However it links to
www.freejock.net
instead of the actual website which is:
www.freejock.com

welshboy's picture
welshboy
Offline
Joined: 11-05-06
Jul 12 2011 09:51

Do they still support the Unabomber?

anarchistsolidarity
Offline
Joined: 27-06-11
Jul 12 2011 12:35

I don't know, why dont you ask them? And what does it matter anyway?

@yearzero, thanks for spotting it, I will let them know ASAP.

welshboy's picture
welshboy
Offline
Joined: 11-05-06
Jul 12 2011 12:40
anarchistsolidarity wrote:
And what does it matter anyway?

Volumes, this speaks it.

Ed's picture
Ed
Offline
Joined: 1-10-03
Jul 12 2011 13:59

It's a bit beside the point though, isn't it? If this was a thread about the good and bad of Brighton ABC then I'd get it but it's not. It's a thread about a guy who's in prison for (probably) accidentally killing a racist football hooligan while defending someone else from a racist attack..

Otherwise it sounds like you reckon that because Jock's case is being supported by Brighton ABC, and Brighton ABC support the Unabomber, then that means that Jock's case isn't worthy of support (or even worse, that Jock is basically the same as the Unabomber).. I'm not saying that this is your opinion (it's hard to gauge an opinion in ten words across two posts) but that's what it seems like..

welshboy's picture
welshboy
Offline
Joined: 11-05-06
Jul 12 2011 14:26

Aye, my bad. Just pissed at this A/S tool.

anarchistsolidarity
Offline
Joined: 27-06-11
Jul 12 2011 15:16

welshboy, I do not remember insulting you and I do not appreciate being called a tool or any other names. I think you should refrain from doing that in future and stick to the subject.

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Jul 12 2011 15:23

This thread is getting overly personal, can everyone try and refrain from any more off-topic remarks or insults. Also, Auld-bod is a new poster and shouldn't just be set upon right away for being a "troll".

@ndy's picture
@ndy
Offline
Joined: 17-03-06
Jul 14 2011 01:14

My apologies. I've been trolled on the subject on my blog for the last three-and-a-half years.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Jul 14 2011 08:50

I suppose some moderate level of personal tension (as seen on this thread) is actually nowhere near as problematic as having poor political judgment, having political alliances without knowing too much about what those groups are doing or avoiding taking clear positions under the guise of investigating, being polite or whatever.

In such an atmosphere this is becoming an unfriendly place for anybody who wants to ask hard questions straight up, lowering the importance of political arguments in favour of some sort of tolerance towards even that which is criticized justifiably.

nastyned
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Jul 14 2011 13:04
akai wrote:
I suppose some moderate level of personal tension (as seen on this thread) is actually nowhere near as problematic as having poor political judgment, having political alliances without knowing too much about what those groups are doing or avoiding taking clear positions under the guise of investigating, being polite or whatever.

In such an atmosphere this is becoming an unfriendly place for anybody who wants to ask hard questions straight up, lowering the importance of political arguments in favour of some sort of tolerance towards even that which is criticized justifiably.

I was one of the people who was at the first IFA congress the AF attended. The only person from the Bulgarian federation was an elderly man, at his first international anarchist congress since the end of the Communist dictatorship. He made a moving speech about how happy he was to be at the congress and not being the political genius you clearly are I was happy to call him comrade.

I was in favour of the AF being affilated to IFA and subseqently we joined. Perhaps you could give me the benefit of your wisdom and tell me where I went wrong?

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Jul 14 2011 13:29

Ned, Akai is clearly a supportive comrade, and has been for a long time so your defensive tone is unnecessary, and could be counter-productive. Please let's be polite to each other, or we will have to lock this thread.

nastyned
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Jul 14 2011 14:22

I'm happy to be polite to people who are polite to me.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Jul 14 2011 14:40

Steven, I appreciate you would like things to be polite, but there is no offense here if NastyNed tries to live up to his moniker, or at least be sarcastic. Really no need to go overboard with moderation, things are not really nasty here.

I really do not understand the lack of political content behind Ned's comment.

Before there was FAB, which was founded in 1990, there were a handful of older Bulgarians in exile in France and a couple of old-timers still in Bulgaria. I knew some of these people, very nice people... but I do not have any idea what this has to do with the current positions of FAB, in particular what this thread was about.

As you can expect, the old-timers in Bulgaria were active a short while after 1990, mostly in making the paper. There was a 45-year break in the movement, these people were in their 70s and 80s and it was a couple of them. Whoever you met and were proud to call comrade, sorry to say, is probably either dead or is not an active part of FAB, so simply this kind of nostalgia is a little out of place. The anarchist movement is not a historic society, and the politics of organizations are not determined by single members, especially not by their historic members who have not been active in a while.

This thread was about the position of FAB on a particular subject and why other organizations which are in the same international have not called them on it. (I assume AF was named in particular here because it is an anglocentric forum and people from the other groups do not participate here in any numbers.) I do not see the logical connection between the current question, the position of FAB, which in my opinion is not acceptable from an anarchist point of view (supporting locking somebody up, saying that the person involved in the racist attack was their friend, aggressively attacking other anarchists who in someway supported Jock, etc. etc.) and your memories of some old man which have nothing to do with this. In fact, it just raises more questions... like does anybody over there actually follow developments in Bulgaria 20 years on?

To be quite honest, I do not know how things came to this in FAB. There were signals over the last few years, it was clear how the membership was changing, although there still seemed to be some decent comrades there. Now they are somewhat silent on the matter, which is all the worst for FAB. Over the more than 3 years that this situation has been an issue, FAB (which is without formal membership by the way), has never issued a statement retracting what they said. I am not aware of any individual members of FAB (again, whatever that means) writing a different point of view, or publically criticizing the objectionable texts.

As far as the rest of it goes, Federations are surely complicated things, but the long and the short of it is the question if there is a more or less common ideological basis for being in a Federation together and whether the thing is a living body which interacts and interchanges with each other enough that people have more or less an idea what is going on. Of course it is difficult to follow exactly, but an international scandal like this one should have been on the radar and I am very surprised and disappointed that people apparently didn't ask questions about it. That's all.

Battlescarred
Offline
Joined: 27-02-06
Jul 14 2011 14:41

Withdrawn

Serge Forward's picture
Serge Forward
Offline
Joined: 14-01-04
Jul 14 2011 14:40
akai wrote:
I suppose some moderate level of personal tension (as seen on this thread) is actually nowhere near as problematic as having poor political judgment, having political alliances without knowing too much about what those groups are doing or avoiding taking clear positions under the guise of investigating, being polite or whatever.

In such an atmosphere this is becoming an unfriendly place for anybody who wants to ask hard questions straight up, lowering the importance of political arguments in favour of some sort of tolerance towards even that which is criticized justifiably.

Criticised justifiably? I don't see any poor political judgement on the part of the AF. In fact, I think the way this is being handled by that organisation shows pretty sound judgement on their part. Any organisation in Britain cannot possibly know everything about a related organisation in another country, whether that goes for the IAF, the IWA or whatever. What they can do however is share certain aims and work together around certain princples. As I understand it, both the AF and FAB joined the IAF on the basis of agreement with the same set of principles, as did all the other sections. However, short of sending investigators into each others organisations and have them placed in each others meetings in order to police them and see whether they continue to measure up, then I don't see how we could do things differently. What's important is, an issue was raised and the AF said they'd look into it.

You must know that the AF would take anything like this very seriously and will certainly be investigating the matter. The fact that the AF has chosen to say nothing before making further investigations shows only good judgement and maturity in the face of a fair degree of petulance and antagonism by certain parties.

On the other hand, we have previously unknown individuals/organisations who seem support Jock Palfreeman and denounce the FAB (and the AF) on the basis of what appears to be simple faith in his innocence, his claimed anti-fascist credentials and the existence of the Roma lads he says he tried to save. They may well be right to support Jock Palfreeman and denounce the FAB but it is not unreasonable for organisations like the AF to at least have a littlle look into things first rather than basing their position on faith.

nastyned
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Jul 14 2011 14:45

Have you discussed Jock Palfreeman with the FAB Akai?