You are no better than the curious and innocent bystanders that you castigate. Of course I was asking for it, just like that slut in the mini-skirt was, and just like the so-called peace activists were. Throughout all of the above it should be obvious to readers that you are not at all interested in engaging in any kind of serious conversation about these issues. Only in escalating them further.

Of course, they were asking for it
Mark Steel
The Independent
June 2, 2010

It’s time the Israeli government’s PR team made the most of its talents, and became available for hire. Then whenever a nutcase marched into a shopping mall in somewhere like Wisconsin and gunned down a selection of passers-by, they could be on hand to tell the world’s press “The gunman regrets the loss of life but did all he could to avoid violence.” Then various governments would issue statements saying “All we know is a man went berserk with an AK 47, and next to him there’s a pile of corpses, so until we know the facts we can’t pass judgement on what took place.”

To strengthen their case the Israelis have released a photo of the weapons they found on board, (which amount to some knives and tools and wooden sticks) that the naive might think you’d expect to find on any ship, but the more astute will recognise as exactly what you’d carry if you were planning to defeat the Israeli army. It’s an armoury smaller than you’d find in the average toolshed in a garden in Cirencester, which goes to show the Israelis had better destroy Cirencester quickly as an essential act of self-defence.

It’s a shame they weren’t more imaginative, as they could have said “We also discovered a deadly barometer, a ship’s compass, which could not only be frisbeed at someone’s head but even had markings to help the assailant know which direction he was throwing it, and a set of binoculars that could easily be converted into a ray-gun.”

That would be as logical as the statement from the Israeli PM’s spokesman – “We made every possible effort to avoid this incident.” Because the one tiny thing they forgot to do to avoid this incident was not send in armed militia from helicopters in the middle of the night and shoot people. I must be a natural at this sort of technique because I often go all day without climbing off a helicopter and shooting people, and I’m not even making every possible effort. Politicians and commentators worldwide repeat a version of this line. They’re aware a nation has sent its militia to confront people carrying provisions for the desperate, in the process shooting several of them dead, and yet they angrily blame the dead ones. One typical headline yesterday read “Activists got what they wanted – confrontation.” It’s an attitude so deranged it deserves to be registered as a psychosis, something like “Reverse Slaughter Victim Confusion Syndrome”.

Israel and its supporters claim that Viva Palestina, made up of people who collect the donated food, cement and items for providing basic amenities such as toilets, and transport them to Gaza, wanted the violence all along. Because presumably they must have been thinking “Hezbollah couldn’t beat them, but that’s because unlike us they didn’t have a ballcock and several boxes of plum tomatoes”.

One article told us the flotilla was full of “Thugs spoiling for a confrontation”, and then accused them of being “Less about aid and more about PR. Indeed, on board was Swedish novelist Henning Mankell.” So were they thugs or about PR? Did they have a thugs’ section and a PR quarter, or did they all muck in, the novelist diverting the soldiers with his characterisation while the thugs attacked them with a lethal spirit level?

But some defenders of Israel are so blind to what happens in front of them there’s nothing at all they wouldn’t jump to defend. Israel could blow up a cats home and within five minutes they’d be yelling “How do we know the cats weren’t smuggling semtex in their fur for Hamas?”

If this incident had been carried about by Iran, or anyone we were trying to portray as an enemy, so much condemnation would have been spewed out it would have created a vast cloud of outrage that airlines would be unable to fly through.

But as it’s Israel, most governments offer a few diplomatic words that blame no one, but accept the deaths are “regrettable”. They might as well have picked any random word from the dictionary, so the news would tell us “William Hague described the deaths as ‘hexagonal’”, and a statement from the US senate said “It’s all very confusing. In future let’s hope they make every effort to avoid a similar incident.”

He is not responsible for the actions of others, especially if they were committed by people with specific hostility toward him. To believe otherwise is to invest him with fantastic powers over the minds and limbs of others. In Innocent Bystander’s case, this strange belief would explain the fervour of his opposition.

…His attitude: I’m not a neo-nazi, but if that’s what they’re going to call us, that’s what we’ll give them. I’m not supporting these guys, I was pissed off at this dude, but I am just pointing out that your actions have consequences [my emphasis]. They may not impact on you, all the more reason for you to be responsible and treat people with some sense of respect regardless of their position as scabs, which as you have now acknowledged, you understand their reasons for being so. And yes it may have been 2008, I can’t remember, and at the time I made sure the loophole crew knew about the reasons for the attack.

This makes absolutely no sense. If someone calls you a pedophile, you don’t rape a baby to prove them wrong. Frankly, this account of what happened sounds like an outright lie or, at least, a massive embellishment to try to bolster a very poor line of reasoning.

“I’d prefer for you to be beaten up than for loophole to be targeted.”

is out of line and incredibly un-comradely even by non-anarchist standards. Whilst I don’t necessarily agree with everything @ndy posts on his blog, he is still a comrade, a mate and an integral part of the anarchist movement here in Melbourne. It’s regrettable that anarchist institutions are targeted because some people in the movement choose to be more vocal than others, but i don’t see how that justifies your position. If you think the actions of some idiots justifies @ndy being attacked then I think there is something very wrong happening down at Loophole.

My thought is that while violence is always regrettable and I’d agree that this was a massive overreaction, I’d prefer for you to be beaten up than for loophole to be targeted.

Bloody hell. That bodes badly for Loophole more than anything.

It was a restless transport [at Auschwitz]… Our Polish Jews knew what was up. And so the whole place swarmed with S.S., and Schillinger, seeing what was going on, drew his revolver. But everything would have gone smoothly except that Schillinger had taken a fancy to a certain body–and, indeed, she had a classic figure. That’s what he had come to see the chief about, I suppose. So he walked up to the woman and took her by the hand. But the naked woman bent down suddenly, scooped up a handful of gravel and threw it in his face, and when Schillinger cried out in pain and dropped his revolver, the woman snatched it up and fired several shots into his abdomen. The whole place went wild. The naked crowd turned on us, screaming. The woman fired once again, this time at the chief…

Schillinger was lying face down, clawing the dirt in pain with his fingers. We lifted him off the ground and carried him–not too gently–to a car. On the way he kept groaning through clenched teeth: “O Gott, mein Gott, was hab’ ich getan, dass ich so lediden muss?”, which means–O God, my God, what have I done to deserve such suffering?

~ Tadeusz Borowski, ‘The Death of Schillinger’ (1959)

All things considered, the treatment of the scabs was pretty mild. I’m thinking “Blackleg Miner” here…

So join the union while you may
Don’t wait ’til your dying day
It might not be that far away
You dirty blackleg miner!

Not that I think some silly little apathetic lefties (I don’t know what this means either) need to be thumped. The boycott worked without that. But when there’s a boycott of a nazi-friendly bar, and you think it’s a big fucking joke, you kind of excuse yourself from the anti-fascist community. Whatever: you have the freedom to be a wanker. But you HAVE excused yourself from the community by violating its norms. Don’t expect anyone to want to hang out with you. Same logic that gets a worker fired for violating OH&S (in a non-profitable way), except that nice “apathetic” people will respect the boss’ right to fire and not a community’s right to exclude people who endanger that community. Apathy is not NEUTRAL, it is tacit support for the status quo. It is siding with the powerful against the oppressed.

Citizen,

You have to be the most morally reprehensible person I’ve ever heard call themself an anarchist (and I’ve met some stupid anarchists before). You think a possible physical attack on @ndy is regrettable, but reckon he had it coming for opposing scabs. And you have openly admitted that you know who was responsible for attacks on anarchist social centres and putting up fascist graffiti. And it seems you intend to continue those friendships and protect them. Probably out of respect for their personal opinions…

The fact is that some opinions, statements, and actions are not “neutral” or limited to individual, private stances. If a person states “I hate niggers,” that person is denying rights, even humanity, to black people. Black people and allies in their struggle have a right to get rid of that person, as a means to protect their own humanity. That includes scabbing on a boycott, defending the rights of neo-nazis, and voicing support for physical assaults on activists.

You’re a mother-fucking fascist. Get fucked.

What the fuck dude? Are you fucking serious? You claim to be an anarchist, yet you are arguing for the violent assault on another anarchist. Fuck off.

You’re an anarchist that is unconcerned about scabs.
You’re an anarchist that wishes to use non-violent communication in order to ‘de-escalate’ conflict with fucking nazis and scabs.
You’re an anarchist that feels it was merely an ‘over-reaction’ to publicly release the (incorrect) name, address and place of employment of another anarchist to nazis. And should that result in a good ol’ bit of a brutal violent assault, it would be preferable to property damage.

You’re an anarchist who blames @ndy for the actions of other people. Cos “he made me, weally, weally, angwy and called me names” counts as a valid justification for harassing a social space @ndy may or may not be associated with.

You’re an anarchist who defends the actions of boneheads, scabs, fuckwit racists, homophobes and other complete dickheads.

You’re an anarchist and I’m the fucking Virgin Mary.

Go fuck yourself.

Lumpen said:

It’s also worth pointing out that these scab pieces of shit also tried to give Mr Slackbastard’s details out publicly (despite being very wrong about pretty much everything) with the expressed intention of having him beaten or worse.

My thought is that while violence is always regrettable and I’d agree that this was a massive overreaction, I’d prefer for you to be beaten up than for loophole to be targeted. You may not have stated previously that these bands were neo-nazis or were supporting them perhaps, though you did insinuate it in a post above as I have already pointed out, but you have been generally antagonistic, again as explained above and as is obvious from the even more recent comments. You may feel all safe in your anonymity to act however you damn please, but if loophole cops the shit from your antagonism, then fuck you. Just be polite. Think about the other people in your community.

And yes, it was not shaun or chunga, but another guy I know in that same scene, who I had a long argumentative conversation with, in which he admitted and boasted about having been the one who with his friends [...] attacked loophole and painted swastikas on their window. His attitude: I’m not a neo-nazi, but if that’s what they’re going to call us, that’s what we’ll give them. I’m not supporting these guys, I was pissed off at this dude, but I am just pointing out that your actions have consequences. They may not impact on you, all the more reason for you to be responsible and treat people with some sense of respect regardless of their position as scabs, which as you have now acknowledged, you understand their reasons for being so. And yes it may have been 2008, I can’t remember, and at the time I made sure the loophole crew knew about the reasons for the attack.

And yes, loophole recently had their windows smashed in. If you were involved with loophole at all you would know about it as they did a big call out for donations to cover the cost of the repairs. I’m not accusing any of these guys of this incident at all, it does seem unlikely that it was politically motivated… just pointing out that loophole has security issues and if there is any way in which you could be contributing to them (through your anonymity and association with the anarchist scene of which loophole, barricade and MARC are three physical symbols) then you should get a life and start acting responsibly. And yes, by that I mean your language. I don’t give a damn if you think you’re a good writer. I haven’t read much of your blog so I’m not going to say. I’d expect that your actual posts are more coherent, well researched and less attacking than your comments. However that is what I am referring to when I speak of your language.

Your abuse of shaun on the basis that he can’t spell: again condescending as all fuck. Just because you are educated does not mean that shaun does not know how to think and does not hold valid opinions. You may not agree with them, that’s all well and good, but at least engage from a position in which you don’t abuse others for their lack of education. Again as anarchists, is that really useful to our cause?

As to the whole understanding and responsibility issue, you misunderstand my point. I was suggesting that in understanding where they are coming from, perhaps you could say something along the lines of ‘well i understand where you are coming from, but disagree for these reasons…’ as opposed to ‘you are silly… ignore everything you’ve said… post racist lyrics… talk about other things… make further insults…’ Responding in such a way would not have made you a social worker, it would have made you someone engaging in non-violent communication – a way of resolving conflict and yet still getting your point across. Instead you escalated the situation and created conflict. This is the crux of my issue with you.

In terms of your responses to me pointing out the ways in which you escalated the shaun comment flame war/whatever, your comments are ridiculous, they continue to be beside the point and escalate the situation. When I point out that shaun never mentioned Gary, you post the lyrics of a song that Gary played. How is that relevant to the point at hand? It isn’t. Its a tactic to sway readers to your perspective as if you’re an anarchist Andrew Bolt, and it’s poorly done if you ask me. Throughout all of the above it should be obvious to readers that you are not at all interested in engaging in any kind of serious conversation about these issues. Only in escalating them further.

This will be my last post. Go ahead and have the last word on all of this. I think the above comments make the situation fairly obvious to readers.

Why should we give free speech to the very people whose agenda it is to take it away from us?

this is a really good point and I used to feel a very similar way myself, it was only after some serious thought on the matter that my opinions started changing.

???