On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:04 AM, rob hollander <email@example.com
> 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
> So...am 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
> 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
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Thadeaus <firstname.lastname@example.org
>> 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:
>> http://deadfish520.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/#!/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 <email@example.com
>> > 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 <deadfish...@gmail.com
>> >> 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.
>> >> http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2011/10/18/occupy-cleveland-protester-a.
> Rob Hollander
> Lower East Side Residents for Responsible Development
> 622 E 11, #10
> NYC, 10009