From:   rob hollander <>
Sent time:   Wednesday, October 19, 2011 2:04:10 AM
Subject:   SPAM-MED: Re: [september17discuss] Re: One rape is one rape too many. I quit the OWS movement

Well, one can't both be a spy and openly hostile. :-)
Deadfish is openly hostile, but not a spy.

Now, if the Deadfish blog were suddenly to disappear, so that occupiers couldn't see the Deadfish rants against OWS, then I'd be suspicious. But as long as that blog is there for all of us to see, I'd call Deadfish just a gadfly. I right, Deadfish?

Reading Deadfish is actually useful. You'll get to see another side's perspective on OWS. Not for everyone, but useful. And Deadfish sparked a discussion to which a lot of listserv members responded with great interest (on whether occupiers should use corporate products like ipods -- confused question, I thought, but it struck a nerve, nevertheless, with many on the listserv).

I don't like internal accusations or efforts to remove. It's counter to the spirit of an open movement. Sends a bad message internally and externally. It should be enough to direct people to the Deadfish blog and let them figure it out for themselves.

Again, if the Deadfish blog disappears, then maybe you have reason to remove Deadfish.

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Thadeaus <> wrote:
How can you quit something that you were never part of "Deadfish?" is the email address of a right-wing a troll and a spy who is openly hostile and attempting to disrupt this movement. You can see this clearly by reading their blog or tweets:!/Scipio_Nasica

We need to be vigilant against anti-social pariahs who prey on and seek to exploit our sometimes too welcoming and open movements. We should watch out for each other and guard against those who only aim to take advantage of us sexually or otherwise.

Still we must also not let allegations like this (even well founded ones) divide and weaken us. Those of us involved in OWS would be wise to be aware of the history of repression of radical movements in this country.

Brian Glick in his book War at Home, outlined a number of tactics that the FBI employed against activists and movements in the past:

  1. Infiltration: Agents and informers did not merely spy on political activists. Their main purpose was to discredit and disrupt. Their very presence served to undermine trust and scare off potential supporters. The FBI and police exploited this fear to smear genuine activists as agents.
  2. Psychological Warfare From the Outside: The FBI and police used a myriad of other "dirty tricks" to undermine progressive movements. They planted false media stories and published bogus leaflets and other publications in the name of targeted groups. They forged correspondence, sent anonymous letters, and made anonymous telephone calls. They spread misinformation about meetings and events, set up pseudo movement groups run by government agents, and manipulated or strong-armed parents, employers, landlords, school officials and others to cause trouble for activists.


On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:38 AM, Lauren <> wrote:
> To be quite honest given your posting history, I'm starting to suspect
> you might be a concern troll.
> On Oct 19, 12:24 am, Deadfish <> wrote:
>> Sorry guys, one rape is one rape too many. This is not what I want to
>> be a part of. A woman at the Cleveland OWS protest says she was raped.
>> I'm out. I quit. I'm done. No ideology or philosophy can justify shit
>> like this.

Rob Hollander
Lower East Side Residents for Responsible Development
622 E 11, #10
NYC, 10009