From:   Will <william.russell.v@gmail.com>
Sent time:   Friday, September 16, 2011 12:38:43 PM
To:   september17 <september17@googlegroups.com>
Subject:   [september17discuss] Re: can someone tell whoever spoke to the Village Voice
 

Hi,

 

I appreciate everyone's comments here, and I feel like most of them

have been constructive. I don't want to draw this out more than

necessary, but I just wanted so say that while I think it's clear that

I didn't present myself as a spokesperson for the GA in the article,

that doesn't change the fact that the Village Voice was not the place

for me to be discussing differences with other activists and it was

inappropriate of me to do so. They should be communicated and debated

between ourselves.

 

In solidarity,

 

Will

 

 

 

On Sep 16, 12:21 am, Will <william.russel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey all, I just posted the comment below in response to the article

> that came out earlier today.  I just want to add to this that while I

> was having this conversation with the reporter I did not realize that

> she was going to transcribe everything I said at that part.  I thought

> it was going to be a column article and not an interview until after

> it was done.  Also, she began the conversation with 'I hear there are

> a lot of anarchists involved,' which doesn't show in the article and

> makes it look like I brought up the topic myself.  I'd like to point

> out that I didn't name any names.  That being said this was my first

> time talking to the press and I pretty well botched it.

>

> The insulting comments about me posted to the article are not

> helpful.  If you have anything else negative you'd like to add I would

> appreciate it if you posted it here, rather than making this any worse

> than it already was.  I will see it.

>

> I'll let the post speak for itself, but again if you have any more

> comments please let me know.

>

> Hey People, especially those from the GA,

>

> I just wanted to clarify a few things from the article which came out

> earlier today.  After reading it, I think the tone of it came out way

> too pessimistic regarding the GA and S17.  More importantly, I didn't

> mean or expect for things to sound so much against certain tendencies

> within the GA, especially since nearly everyone involved has been such

> a pleasure to organize with.  I have an enormous amount of respect for

> these individuals from the GA both as people and as organizers, even

> if there are some political differences between us.  In the end I

> believe we share common goals, which is why I value our relationships

> and the importance of us working together.

>

> While I do stand by arguments I made, I recognize that the Voice was

> not the best place to air some of these differences, particularly the

> one about liaisons, which was inappropriate for me to talk about with

> a reporter.  If I had fully understood the format of the article which

> was to be written, I would have refrained from discussing several of

> these issues and instead have focused on the more logistical issues

> around S17 and its promotion.

>

> I would also like to clarify that New Yorkers Against the Budget Cuts

> operates as a separate group from the GA.

>

> As an individual I fully stand with the GA, which we have all worked

> so hard together to build, in the expectation that S17 will be a step

> forward in the fight against budget cuts and the war on the working

> class in the United States and internationally.

>

> In solidarity,

>

> Will Russell

>

> On Sep 15, 8:44 pm, David Graeber <da...@anarchisms.org> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> > rule #1 of all activist media work is you don't badmouth other activists to the press.

>

> > I mean I know a lot of you guys are inexperienced but this is beyond obnoxious.

> >         David

< PREV INDEX SEARCH NEXT >