Revealing Grasses on Indymedia

An IMC geezer | 14.01.2011 15:05 | Indymedia | Repression

Dos & Dont of using Indymedia to expose infiltrators / informers.

Indymedia is a news resource, and an important depository of information for the activist movement. What it is not is a space for publishing unsubstantiated rumours about activists. Please do not use it for such. Causing suspicion and distrust without solid factual basis for it only serves the State and corporations. Unsubstantiated allegations should be and will be deleted - it's not censorship, it is protecting people from malicious rumour- mongering. It is also well known that fascist, journalists, the state and private security firms constantly scour Indymedia and use it to post mis-information.

Northern Indymedia have recently finished developing a set of guidelines in what to do in relation to exposing some on the Northern Indymedia site. They can be found here:

http://northern-indymedia.org/zines/1174

This project is still in progress, however, given that there is a lot of comment and scaremongering going on at the moment, it is worth having it in wider circulation.

An IMC geezer

Comments

Hide the following 6 comments

CENSORS

14.01.2011 22:14

Of course its censorship. Just because you might think it's 'bad' information doesn't mean removing it is not censorship.

Angle Grinder

censorship it ain't

14.01.2011 22:32

Angle Grinder. You are confused. Censorship is banning something from being published; the way the state does. Choosing not to publish something (or to hide it) is completely different. If people want to make shit up about fellow activists, they are free to do so; but they can do so elsewhere. Its not like its hard to put stuff on the interwebs these days, now is it?

sawtooth

Put your real name up Angle Grinder

14.01.2011 22:32

And then we can post unsubstantiated attacks on you.

You'd obviously be against having it removed.

Hatchet Job

sawtooth

14.01.2011 23:04

What you are describing is self-censorship.

Angle Grinder

Dissing disinfo.

15.01.2011 22:36

"Of course its censorship. Just because you might think it's 'bad' information doesn't mean removing it is not censorship."

Removing it is a matter of the public interest, not censorship.

The public have a right to know...the truth...and nothing but the truth.

The disinformation we shall leave to the state's press.

Knot eyed Jaguar

We have found another one

22.01.2011 18:18

We think we have found someone that needs to be exposed. He/she has been active in Scotland, for a few years already.

We have loads of evidence of
- being very curious about activists,
- disrupting actions,
- entrapment,
- provoking, promoting and encouraging violence towards 'targets' and other activists,
- previous activity on the 'other side'

Further indications:
- He/she never does any arrestable actions him/herself,
- brags about sabotage actions that didn't happened,
- volunteering for roles that give access to information
- He/she buys people with alcohol, drugs and lifts,
- He/she has more money than the benefit he/she is officially on,
- Has broken off a sexual relationship with an activist, very recently

We need help to find evidence of who he/she is working for.
We need help to deal with the requirements as listed above, to get to the stage that we can publish and warn others.

Who can help us?

Found