Saboteur?
wo, 25/09/2024 - 09:40 — nn
Hier kun je discussieren over Saboteur?.
Bwahahahahaaa *ademt even* bwahahahahahaaaa. If you lot could project any harder you'd be a cinema. Zoals ik al zei in mijn verwijderde comment, Abtin Parsa had gelijk met wat hij schreef, en Sjerp van Wouden ook, en ikzelf uiteraard ook. Maar ga nog maar wat meer het gat lekken van jullie Right Sector en OUN vriendjes...
So everything I said in my
So everything I said in my earlier texts (https://www.indymedia.nl/node/52304 https://www.indymedia.nl/node/53613 https://indymedia.nl/node/54833) has now been fully confirmed on LibCom: https://libcom.org/article/collaboration-pro-war-anarchists-far-right-ma...
Yet the people who run this website continue to move my texts on this subject to Ruis without reason or even outright delete my comments with ridiculous accusations of "saboteur" (https://indymedia.nl/node/51576#comment-40942). If you were actually concerned with your "spelregels" then you would, on the contrary, have been moving texts like this (https://www.indymedia.nl/node/54602) to Ruis. Indeed, you'd have deleted it entirely as your spelregels clearly state is to be done with fascist content.
If you (the moderation team of this website) had any integrity in you then by now you would resign your position and let actual anarchists take your place.
You're problem is not being
You're problem is not being 'right' or 'wrong' you're problem is that you post conspracy theories about all kinds of groeps without proper foundation.
How about you directly quote
How about you directly quote a claim I made that you consider "conspiracy theories about all kinds of groeps without proper foundation" and we'll discuss that? You just calling proven accusations (such as of fundraising for members of fascist militia groups or of hiding such information from the people asked to donate) as "conspiracy theories" doesn't make it so.
Yeah that's what I thought...
Yeah that's what I thought... The proper thing to do if you make such a claim and can't back it up would be to retract it. But I won't hold my breath, as I'm willing to bet that gesturing about non-existent "conspiracy theories" is all you got to defend the decisions you've been making.
So summing up:
- Agreeing with something Sjerp or Abtin said = What a horrible thing, how could you possible want to be linked to any of these persons?!
- Raising funds for fascist militia groups while hiding this from the people asked to give money = Please use our website as much as you want, and as an added bonus we'll make sure to remove anything that informs about this.
Have I got it about right?
Well? You've defended your
Well? You've defended your decisions by baselessly accusing me of posting "conspiracy theories" and then failing to provide even a single quote to back it up. Either put up or retract.
In the meantime, through my posts you've already been informed years ago (in detail!) about things like Petrovichev's engagement in the OUN or Samoylenko's engagement in the Right Sector, yet you've simply moved all this information to Ruis without providing a reason. While at the same time you continued to allow your site to be used to elicit donations by appealing to these very same characters, with appeals that continued to hide this very information from the people who are asked to donate. Trying to get people's money under false pretenses seems to be a recurring theme for some self-proclaimed "anarchist" groups, see Sjerp's text where he reported on the same thing happening to him (though apparently he did get his money back, while my open question Q2 to Vrije Bond from several years ago remains unanswered: https://www.indymedia.nl/node/52304).
Are the people who run this site perhaps members of Vrije Bond themselves? The Athens Indymedia has regular accountability processes, when was the last time you had any sort of accountability process?
Also i donot understnad why
Also i donot understnad why you want to bw linked to zionist Sjerp and lying manarchist rapist Abtin
What is it with all this
What is it with all this essentialist stuff anyway? Are you lot even capable of arguing the actual content of positions instead of just churning out essentialist quips (Sjerp *is* a "crazy zionist", Abtin *is* a "manarchist rapist", ...)? What I said is that I agreed with (part of) the content of their arguments. This is still supposed to be an anarchist movement instead of a bunch of little kids on a playground playing clique games about who is "linked" with who and what not, isn't it?
Please feed the trolls,
Please feed the trolls, they're getting hungry again xxx