unite_info_131en

UNITE! Info #131en-rep:

The merry Murray "M-L" melee

31.03.2008

Intro note, 2008 (for various reasons, rather long):

Here's a repeat, in more easily readable html form, of my Info #131en, which was sent to some newsgroups, mailing lists and individual e-mail addresses on 21.08.2000 in text document form and in 8 parts, part 1/8 etc.

A main reason why I'm bringing this repeat now is the fact that there recently was - or, it can perhaps be said, still is going on - a precisely similar, likewise quite instructive and likewise also rather funny, "melee" at one of those mailing lists which exist today and which, at least officially, have as their theme the questions of Marxism, or of Marxism-Leninism, namely, the list MLL, which has the web address http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list. (As shown by its archive, that mailing list has existed since March 2000. Today, it has been said rather recently, it has some 200 subscribers.)

What can be done with a mailing list for Marxism, if it's approximately soundly constructed and handled?

On principle, I think, nothing less than a gathering on it of all forces on earth who really are in favour of the international proletarian revolution (exceptions, unfortunately, and important such, necessarily being those who live in such countries or otherwise under such conditions that they by a very use, on their part, of the Internet immediately would risk imprisonment or execution), of all forces who want to combine with each other for exchange of information and for serious discussion about that burning question:

How are the vast majority of people on this planet to take it over from those ridiculously small, but of course organizationally and militarily at present very powerful, cliques of reactionary bourgeois/imperialist scum who today still are controlling it? - A problem which, more or less, for each day that passes, only more and more loudly is shrieking out for a solution.

At least a certain contribution to the solving of this problem, in my opinion, can be made by/at such a mailing list, which of course cannot start out as anything else than a very small thing, only, its potentialities should be enormous.

The ruling imperialists, it's to be expected, will not be very friendly towards there occurring any serious international discussions which such a mailing list, on principle, makes possible. They are likely to try to counteract the development of such discussions, by various means and at various levels of counteraction, depending on how small or how big a threat they are considering such a thing to be, at various possible stages of development that it may get to reach.

A problem for those imperialists in this respect, and an advantage for any combining forces really of the proletariat and of the oppressed peoples, of course is and will continue to be: Those ruling cliques will not be able to close the entire Internet down. It's here to stay, and with this some enormous possibilities also for proletarian forces to combine and to unite internationally. If one channel of such should come to be closed or otherwise made useless, certainly, such forces as may already have begun to combine no doubt will be able to find another.

Since the early1990s (at least), there have existed some such mailing lists on which actual international discussion about the big problem mentioned has been possible, at least during a certain time. (Experience seems to show that Usenet newsgroups, despite their advantage of being almost impossible to censor, are less favourable for such.) The big drawback with practically all of those mailing lists which have existed so far has been that they have been - either from the beginning on or else from some later stage on - under the control of (more or less "well-camouflaged") bourgeois forces, who have closed them down or have imposed such conditions on them as to make all serious discussions at the list in question, in the interests of the proletariat, more or less impossible in practice.

Those camouflaged bourgeois forces who have been controlling such mailing lists often have been arguing, towards their subscribers, in order to prevent actual discussions, that "harm can be done" to those subscribers, or to some of them, or to the mailing list in question, in basically two ways:

1) "Reactionary, pro-bourgeois statements", and/or "statements of defamation of some subscribers", or "of the mailing list itself", or "of generally respected earlier proletarian leaders" may appear, and "this must be prevented". This "argument", for the suppression of actual debate, of course is very wrong. It's very much to be expected, of course, that people will say some wrong things, sometimes even some rather reactionary ones, without meaning to. Then those statements can and should be criticized, and if possible refuted, by others. "Harm" even the smallest fly, so to speak, certainly no such statement can do.

Marx adherents appearing in public (over the Internet, above all) who are not used to being subjected to defamations and verbal hate attacks at least some100 times per day must be doing something seriously wrong.

Openly racist and Nazi statements should indeed be counteracted also organizationally, I hold, since they advocate what practically everybody, rightly, considers to be crimes against humanity. But the dissemination of larger amounts of such, at mailing lists said to be for discussion of Marxism, can be prevented very easily, and if a little of this commodity should slip by, surely, no big harm can have been caused to anybody by this, and in particular, hardly any to that vital interest of continued discussion of the important matters.

In the course of actual and open discussion - as long as such is possible - differences of opinion, even quite sharp ones, also among people who all sincerely favour the proletarian revolution, of course will appear. As Mao Zedong, for instance, has pointed out: "Marxism is a wrangling ism." In many cases, long experience has shown, it's only after some serious and sometimes protracted wrangling among a number of people that the important truth, or truths, comes out. Marx adherents therefore should never fear such wrangling and certainly should not consider it "an insult to their personality" or "a defeat", if they - "purely as an exception", say - in due course should turn out to have been wrong, on a point or other. They would in such cases instead have won a certain victory, for themselves and for the proletariat, of their having gained a bit of new knowledge.

2) "Camouflaged reactionaries and dyed-in-the-wool anti-Marxists", and even "paid agents and operatives of the imperialists' intelligence services" may appear on such mailing lists, and "this must be prevented", and/or "such people must be kicked off the list whenever found out" - thus runs a second "argument" for suppressing open discussion. This of course is utter nonsense too. Very obviously, bourgeois-reactionaries and also direct agents and spies always will appear on such mailing lists. But what harm can they possibly do, on a mailing list, to the interests of the Marx adherents, or to those of other honest supporters of the common interests of the vast majority of people, as long as open debate still continues? Absolutely none, even if there should be droves and droves of them.

(Something which it also is very difficult, almost impossible, for the ruling reactionaries, to bring about, since they precisely are so enormously outnumbered in the world and practically everybody just hates their guts - harder and harder, therefore, does it get too, today, for the imperialists to recruit even "a minimum of" "reasonably effective" agents of theirs, even in those relatively "rich" countries where there still is considerable corruption of some groups of people on account of those enormous superprofits which they're squeezing out of the people in the poorer, internationally-oppressed countries.)

Some dyed-in-the-wool reactionaries and intelligence service agents it, on the contrary, is quite good to have on a Marxism-oriented list, namely, as instructive negative examples, as "skeletons-in-the-classroom-corners", so to say. By no means should those who organize such mailing lists, in case they do want to serve the interests of the proletariat, strive to kick such subscribers out of them.

It's in an attempt at applying, as well as possible, the above-stated principles that I on my part have created (as I did on 01.07.2007), and am "running", a mailing list called "Modern Marxism". Its web address is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/modern_marxism/, and there's a standing Invitation to it at my homepage. When I'm writing this, it has 47 members, from 5 continents. It probably was a little "recruitment drive" of mine, with the abovementioned Invitation sent per e-mail to a number of addresses which I had "dug up", that resulted in 9 more people's finding their way to it in the last 7 days, something which of course has pleased me very much.

I wrote about the members of this mailing list in one posting to it on 13.03, directed to one other of them and reproduced in a section of (the quite long - as is this one too) Info #311en, of 14.03.2008:

"Politics that really, consistently and with sufficient knowledge for it actually to make a difference, is in favour of the international proletariat and the vast majority of people today, that's something which comes down to a matter of no more than some individuals here and there, I believe. Each of you others, thus, who have gathered on this mailing list, for instance, I'm viewing as, potentially at least, an internationally not unimportant political 'potentate' or force."

I've earlier been subscribing to some other mailing lists whose names and descriptions have had to do with Marxism - with membership numbers varying between a few dozen and some 200-300 - and today I'm subscribing to a couple of other such too. It was on a few such mailing lists, in particular on one of them, that, back in the year 2000, there took place something which, in the title of this Info, I'm calling a "melee".

A language note:

Perhaps not everybody is familiar with the somewhat unusual word "melee", which I had found in some books dealing with military history and which I've checked out now again, in a couple of dictionaries which I have and at the Internet's Wikipedia, in order to see if the manner in which I used it, back in 2000, covers that which I intended it to cover. This in fact it does, rather precisely. My respective sources on "melee" say:

Wyld (UK, 1952) (spelling it "mêlée"): "Confused fight, skirmish, conflict, affray". Webster (USA, 1993): "1: a fight or contest between individuals mingled in a confused mass: a confused struggle; 2: a cavalry exercise in which two groups of riders try to cut paper plumes off the heads of their opponents; 3: a confused mingling together of often incongruous elements". Wikipedia (Internet, present time): "Melee (from the French mêlée IPA: [mɛle]) generally refers to disorganized close combat involving a group of fighters. A melee ensues when groups become locked together in combat with no regard to group tactics or fighting as an organized unit; each participant fights as an individual.". Yes, that's what I meant and mean. These explanations cover those aspects of that word which I wanted it to have too.

Now is it natural or not to have some melees occurring on mailing lists having to do with Marxism, and are they in general good or bad things?

It's rather natural that such occur, I think, on such mailing lists which in reality are controlled by, basically, bourgeois forces. This is because, when things "hotten up" in certain debates on really important political matters, the bourgeois forces will "run out of arguments" against the proletarian ones completely. They then can and will do nothing else than try in various ways to suppress the discussion, using such "arguments" for "justifying" this as those mentioned above - in case they don't find it "necessary" to close down the entire mailing list, something which would expose those responsible for this very clearly as utter reactionaries, of course.

"Melees" are liable to occur on mailing lists of that type, as a result of such suppression attempts, which will then be opposed more or less consistently by various more or less pro-proletariat forces on that list, and supported more or less consistently by the various more or less pro-bourgeoisie ones. Typical of them is that there in the antagonistic contradiction bourgeoisie-proletariat, the bourgeoisie is relatively strongly represented on the list in question, so that the outcome of the melee, or struggle - will there in fact be suppression of the discussion, or will there not? - will remain uncertain, perhaps for a rather long time. Anyway, such melees in themselves, such sharpening of the struggle, under such conditions, absolutely are good things. They always make it much clearer, who (among the list members, above all) is really on the side of which class.

On such mailing lists as the one managed by me, which - this I'm maintaining, myself, now, as something for readers of this to judge on themselves, whether they find it true or false - is controlled by a pro-proletariat force (me!), there will hardly occur any melees, of that kind which I mean, anyway. Because I certainly don't want any suppression of the discussion at that list, and I don't intend to listen to any suggestions of or "arguments for" or such suppression, by any other list member(s). As "list dictator", I'm decreeing: No suppression. (Unless there's spam in such big amounts that these create a problem, or Nazi propaganda, which will rather soon be put an end to too.)

There was, rather recently, at the MM list managed by me, a somewhat sharp debate, of an antagonistic character too, occasioned by my (finally) having ascertained and pointing out, as I did on 02.03.2008, that a certain list member (since December 2007), "marxist front" <marxistfront@yahoo.co.in>, was not at all any existing person or group "in India", or anywhere else, but was one of quite many "cyber ghosts" invented, for swindle and disturbance purposes, by a certain small-time reactionary in the USA by the name of Thomas P. Murray. He was not pleased with this and in retaliation wrote to the list, i.a. "COMRADES BEWARE OF THIS CIA AGENT ROLF" (me), which I didn't find it necessary to counter with anything else than writing to the list, in reply, "Nice try, Murr-Murr-Ghostie!"

And then another list member, David Walters <dave.walters@comcast.net> - whom I had invited personally to MM already in August 2007 for, hopefully, making that list more lively, since he then (and several months onwards too, as MM list member), despite being a Trotskyite, did not fear debate - got it into his head that he should try to "rescue" that poor scumbag Murray from having had his "Indian" "cyber ghost" exposed. David did this by his, among other things, "telling" me, in a rather sharp tone too, what I in the future "should write" respectively "not write". To this I replied by pointing out that it showed how very closely David "Dino" Walters, unfortunately, was connected with the reactionary bourgeoisie in the world.

Certainly, I didn't dream of perhaps kicking out, or of applying any other list organization pressure on, any of those those two, whose respective characters presumably had become clearer by this little "open and frank exchange of views" (as the diplomats call it) which we had had. With "Dino" I'm continuing too that earlier co-operation concerning the Marxists Internet Archive (MIA) which I had begun even earlier - he's one of the main editors of MIA. Under the conditions of this list, the bourgeois reactionaries, whose more or less only "political weapon", against a consistently Marxist political line (which I think I've been representing and upholding, so far), consists of attempts at suppressing the discussion, don't stand much of a chance, politically.

The story about this rather recent altercation, at the MM list, is told by my (quite long) Info #311en, "A debate on 'cyber ghosts', Mao Zedong's line and how to unite", of 14.03.2008.

A perhaps sharp, complicated debate, conducted in a friendly manner - thus involving only non-antagonistic contradictions, such which Mao Zedong called "contradictions among the people" - this would not be, or occasion, something which I'd call a "melee".

But, as mentioned in the beginning of this intro note, both back in August 2000 and also quite recently, in late March 2008, there have been a couple of such "melees" which have been both instructive and (I think, at least) funny. The story about the firstmentioned I'm telling in the below here, of course.

Concerning the story about the recent (or perhaps not yet finished) one, it may be be of interest to the readers, I think - to those who don't shy away, I mean, from reading this stuff because it is pretty long (and thus, hopefully, all the more instructive) - to get to know: The more or less "main character" in the August 2000 melee, a "cyber ghost" of the abovementioned Murray's "whom"/which I then called "Question Mark" (surname "Scott"), then actually no more than 2 days old (but "cyber ghosts" of course can dispense with such "tedious business" as childhoods etc), was/is "the main character" in that equally farcical "melee" of late March 2008. He was/is being kowtowed to now, or recently, by a number of (nominally) grown-up people over at that mailing list, MLL, as its "strongman" and "chief Marxist-Leninist ideologue" (yes, it's true!), and already several times has threatened to "resign", as he has called it, from that list. (This "big boss" of MLL doesn't just "join" mailing lists, you see, as might you or I, but "gets appointed to" them, as some sort of an "official".) This of course would leave the poor flesh-and-blood bourgeoisie-friendly members there with (almost) no "cyber ghost" support, more or less "at the mercy of" "those horrible" proletariat-friendly ones.

But still it's too early to predict the outcome of that - likewise very merry - melee now at the list MLL.

Here follows the story about the one (mainly at a list called "ISML", apparently still in existence) which took place in August 2000.

Citizen ex-"SiberiaSwamp Kommandant" Jim Hillier, UK <Jim.Hillier@btinternet.com>,

[Added in 2008:

Why I back in 2000 bestowed that title - of perhaps not the most complimentary kind - on Jim Hillier, despite his having recently asked me some questions in a quite friendly way, in an e-mail sent privately to me - readers will understand, I hope, after reading Appendix B in this Info, which comes at the very end of it.

It so happens too that Jim Hillier today is one of the 5 members of the Moderators Panel of that mailing list, MLL, where the repeat "melee" of this year has taken place (or is taking place). The other 4, listed at the MLL's website, are Alan Dover (New Zealand), Charles F. Moreira (Malaysia), George Gruenthal (USA) and Sven Buttler (Germany).]

You wrote to me on Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:37:11 +0100, smack in the middle of the most hilarious part (so far!) of what I shall call 'the merry Murray mock-up-"Marxist-Leninist" melee' on the so-called "International-Struggle-M-L list" which you're subscribed to too, asking me privately some questions.

I don't mind replying to them, this of course publicly. It's suitable anyway, I think, to go into these questions at this point with a (8-part) posting in the present Info series. This above all in order to provide some information on them to those who really are striving to organize for worldwide proletarian revolution. I have to say at once that past experience indicates that you are not among them. But this, in my opinion, need not mean that you and I couldn't both benefit from reciprocal exchange of information on various matters and from co-operation, on a united-front basis, on such points where we might have some interests in common.

Would it be possible for me, you're asking, to explain to you why I think the two Internet writers you mentioned - precisely two of the most panicky high-to-heaven-howlers, comical "karate"kickers and agitated arm waverers in that little "deflection"-dogfight which some ultra forces are trying now in order to protect their big masters in the world - are the same person?Yes, I shall gladly show you, and others, the rather simple reasoning behind this.

Or, to be more exact, I actually don't think they're the same person. We have to do here with some real cases of what in "Orwellian" language are called "unpersons" - just some stage props which get dissolved into puffs of smoke as soon as you give them some sound punches in their ugly grimacing faces. But they're doing their best anyway, together with their few actually human puppeteers too, to appear as a whole big flock of shrieking hyenas, howling wolves, monsters coming at you from everywhere and vampires enough to darken the sky - "BOOOH!" Some quotes I shall bring below will show all what I mean.

1. On how the struggle between revolution and reaction often appears, as it has turned out in the present small fight too

Those actually striving to represent revolution, represent Marxism in the world, must always be prepared to encounter this phenomenon, a seemingly "overwhelming" array of the most awful monsters, who're making propaganda for sometimes this, sometimes that long-since refuted phony"Marxist", in reality arch-bourgeois, line and are maintaining that they are the ones who're representing the overthrow of that bourgeoisie whose interests they on the contrary precisely represent, and that they "of course are the big majority".

It in fact is the case that such forces (those which you encounter directly, at least) are always much more numerous than the actual sincere revolutionaries. This is because it's the bourgeoisie in the world who are organized, nationally and internationally, and are secretly supporting and even "pre-emptively" launching phony organizations supposedly "opposing" them, while the workers and the oppressed peoples have practically no organizations which are really their own.

But what proletarian revolution is all about is representing the common interests of the vast majority of people on earth. And those who by their political line are doing this will have, visibly only more or less indirectly perhaps, the support of the people too. They therefore, as long as they're pursuing such a correct line, will represent a strength much bigger than any "majority of organized political forces" which opposes that line, and therefore should not care one tiny bit however loudly the conscious phonies and/or those who're wrong are yelling "we are thousands, while you are only five or ten; you must bow to us!"

2. How did it soon become clear that the writers you asked about were phony Marxists and not even real persons?

Because of that insincerity which they soon demonstrated in practice, in the first place, and by the quite extraordinary inconsistency of their actions too, in the second. Their oneness there was reason to suspect on account of some very typical similarities in their respective approaches. I shall soon give you some details.

The thing in this case has been, that the reactionary "cyber ghosts" have been, and still are, supported by some actual persons whose opportunism - or worse - they have suited just perfectly, which is why those people have not even wanted to see that they're ghosts either, although this hasn't been all that difficult. (Well, those who haven't encountered the phenomenon of phony "persons" on the Net before perhaps may be excused a little if they don't hit on that idea by themselves at once.)

You mentioned one "Dawn", full name "Meia Dawn" - and to any "Net-connected" person who's a little interested in Marxism and thus has looked up, or at least seen the name of, that important Marx-Engels Internet Archive (MEIA) at http://www.ex.ac.uk/ Projects/meia/index1.htm, such a first name as "Meia" at once must hint, at least, at the possibility of there being some tongue-in-cheek bourgeois prankster behind it, mustn't it? And how genuine does the name of that (to me unknown) organization which she said she was in, the "Red Comrades Documentation Project"(!), sound to actual Leftists?

"Midway Meia" <meia_dawn@my-Deja.com> (who hasn't wanted to say whether "she/he" is a man or a woman; I've been calling "her" a "her" for simplicity) is "an adherent of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin", she's said. Yes, but you cannot be this today without also being an adherent of Mao Zedong, who as all know was the main exposer of the treason of the Soviet revisionists and social-imperialists since the early 1960s on, and for decades the main continuer of Marxism. So "Meia's" line was suspect from the start, although she has added too that she does hold Mao Zedong's and others' criticism of the so-called "modern" revisionism swindle to be correct.

The other writer you mentioned, "Sue T Simonson" <progressivesociety@juno.com>, who likewise made her public Net appearance this year, a little before "Meia" who has said she knows "Sue" too, at first seemed to be someone who was, politically, quite well-informed and advanced. She advocated the line of Marx, Lenin and Mao Zedong, she said, and had also clearly seen through the "RCP"-USA and that big international swindle connected with it, the purported "preparatory International" the "RIM", as utter phonies. Very much did she appreciate, she wrote, to have gotten informed of that mailing list managed by Per Rasmussen, Denmark, the Power to the People list (reached by <pttp-subscribe@egroups.com>) to which I was also subscribing. (As you may recall, Jim, it was I who first - during a long time, alone in this - publicly exposed and denounced the "RIM" as a complete fraud [in fact controlled by the CIA, as I've demonstrated too], from 1994 on and via the Net from early 1996 on.)

Since there are, internationally, so extremely few actual Marxists (whom it's possible to contact via the Net anyway), "Sue" at first looked like she might be a not unimportant small force.

Now she had not seen through that purported "critic" (from 1996 on), but real behind-the-scene supporter, of the "RIM" leaders, the phony "MPP"-USA led by the agent of US imperialism "Quispe". Fair enough; it so happened that I could inform her in detail on that question. (Those "reserve" swindlers btw have left their own publication "The New Flag" and their earlier website and joined a parallel crook-led group, the "Mao"_Quacks, whose quite good Mao Zedong archive at www.maoism.org people absolutely should read, while not falling for their political tricks - nor for those of that other "RIM tail" the "CSRP"-USA.)

But when I posted document after document, to the pttp list and to newsgroups, from the big international Internet "Quispe" fight in mid-1996, in the course of which those agent forces were completely exposed and that big "aircraft carrier" of anti-Marxist subversion the "RIMitz" left even lower in the water, very "curiously", "Sue" was suddenly not one bit interested any more. Only after repeated prodding on my part and a full month later did "Sue" reply at all concerning this, and then, even more "strangely", refused to see those facts which the documents from 1996 very simply and clearly showed.

"Sue" didn't even want to discuss these things - nor any others, for that matter - with me any more. On her own part, she had shown us other readers one part of a "critique" of the "RIM" written by her which I could see at once was not sincerely meant but could only be a pretense at a such by a person of out-and-out (openly-)bourgeois persuasion who was trying laboriously to copy how a Marx adherent might think and write. ("Comrades", for instance, the actually bourgeois writer, out of touch with any actual Leftists, clearly had thought must be one suitable and impressive term to use, in every second sentence or so.)

Further, "Sweet Sue" had a curiously close connection to and co-operation with one other writer who had appeared shortly before her and who apparently believed not only in "God" but also in "non-violence" and thus was just about as far from a Marxist or even a genuinely Leftist standpoint as was imaginable, "Mature Martha". The latter, a "young grandmother" whose repeated nonsensical postings to pttp eventually drew a surprised question from Per too, after which she "went off to Wisconsin for 14 days", later posted a quite flattering comment concerning the quality of my writings ("Christian forgiveness" perhaps; I had sharply attacked her reactionary views and pointed out to all that she, like "Sue", was a "cyber ghost"), and not only this:

In an - absolutely welcome, but rather baffling - turn-around from her earlier "no guns!" position, "Martha" now recently co-signed an international joint statement, for which Per and I had taken the initiative, in support of the just defence struggle of the DR Congo against the massive imperialist aggression which that country is being subjected to. She even included a street address and a phone number of hers when signing. (See below; I wager you, or anyone, 1,000 Congolese Francs against 10 that you'll not be able to contact "Martha" anyway.)

3. Some vital political matters recently discussed on the ISML and PTTP lists, against which background the melee in particular must also be seen

- First, the question of support for the DR Congo

One important thing which was recently not so much directly debated on these lists as organized via them, and via some others (the Activist Mailing list [http://get.to/activist], the mlmtt list managed by Per and likewise subscribed to by me <subscribe-mlmtt@egroups.com> and some others which Per is on), precisely was that joint international statement in support of the DR Congo. It was a "small" but very "broad" thing, with 13 signatures to it, by individual writers and some organizations in Denmark, Sweden, France, the USA, Greece, New Zealand, India and Malaysia, when it was sent publicly on 17 August, one more (USA) being added to it immediately afterwards.

Many are those organizations around the world which are designating themselves "Marxist-Leninist" or "Leftist"; "strangely" few of them however have had much or even anything to contribute towards supporting the Congolese people in their enormous struggle against this most massive imperialist aggression which has been going on since August 1998, stagemanaged by US imperialism above all and vilely supported by as good as all the imperialist, so-called rich states, which has so far cost the lives of over 1.7 million people and which entails that half of the DR Congo is under foreign occupation, ravaging, plunder and fascist terror, with massacre after massacre perpetrated by the aggressor imperialist-proxy forces.

Therefore, even this "small" joint action was of some importance, it may be hoped, possibly helping develop such a big and broad international movement of support of the Congolese people which is absolutely necessary but which so far exists in organisatorically only far too weak forms. (The really non-Marxist PTB, Belgium, from the beginning has been one force leading the way forward on this, and some small efforts have been undertaken by for instance the miniscule DR Congo Committee here in Sweden, founded precisely in August 1998 and led by Bony Ndjov-a-Shamalo; I'm one of its founding members too.)

In an Appendix A, in the last part of this posting, I shall reproduce that international joint statement with its signatures.

4. The giant decades-long international "AIDS" terror propaganda hoax

Another question of the most vital international importance, which has been debated recently on these lists, is a matter likewise of life or death to millions of people and a struggle whose outcome depends very much on whether the scientific truth will become known and understood by hundreds of millions or whether a most perverted and directly genocidal ENORMOUS PROPAGANDA LIE disseminated jointly by ALL the imperialists since close to TWO DECADES BACK now. This big lie is considered so vital, by the US imperialists, to make people continue to believe in, worldwidely, that earlier this year the further dissemination of it, and the further suppression, as far as at all possible, of the (already long-since discovered) truth on the matter was entrusted directly to that organ of theirs for international counter-revolution, the CIA.

It's the propaganda hoax, started in the early/mid-80s, that there is a new "disease syndrome" called "AIDS", that "it" is "infectious" and in particular, "possible" or even "likely" to be transferred sexually, that it "is being caused by" a purported "virus", called "HIV", which nobody in all those years has even seen and which in all probability, according to the actual experts, doesn't even exist.

Since some time back now, there exists an Internet website, www.virusmyth.com, which already completely refutes this big lie in such clear terms that people with practically no scientific knowledge of their own on this matter too can see that that's the truth on it - they only need to realize that you must NOT TRUST the imperialist exploiting and oppressing scumbags and their totally perverted mass media AT ALL, NOT on ANY question of general importance - and which is being hosted by South Africa's president Mbeki [Added in 2008: It was or is not actually hosted by him], who [by this and] by an international "AIDS" conference in Durban last June, where the truth was allowed to be argued for, got into considerable conflict with those international forces which South Africa in other respects has been and still is largely obeying, above all the US imperialists.

It so happened that I got to know about this website, informed about it a couple of weeks ago by a co-supporter (in Canada) of that abovementioned national liberation struggle of the Congolese people, and since then have started to contribute towards this truth's becoming known and understood internationally, beginning with a few "immediate-reflection" postings and with my 'UNITE! Info #129en: The "AIDS virus" terror hoax' (in 2 parts) of 13 August, which I hope helped explain the main facts on this to as many as possible.

5. Likely connections with the present (already a little "cooled-down") "merry melee"

My postings on this subject were welcomed quite warmly by some other Net writers and (of course) hatefully rejected (with no actual arguments advanced against what I had stated) by certain others. They caused a brief debate on the ISML list with Hari Kumar, who manages that list and who on his part, as to issues of Marxism, is still applauding the very wrong and really ridiculous total about-turn by the formerly rather important Marxist-Leninist Enver Hoxha, who from 1978 on tragically started vilifying Marxism in general and his own former long-time associates the Chinese communists as led by Mao Zedong in particular, bringing also of course, on such a political "basis", the country he led, Albania, economically on to a course which would soon prove to be disastrous.

Citizen Hari's wrong views (which it was not at all unnatural of course that he had been misled into holding, to start with) were soundly refuted by me in this brief "AIDS" debate, but he (as did some others too) continued to cling on to them, seemingly not even being very interested in trying to find out the actual main facts on them and ending that discussion on his part rather quickly.

Whether or not to support the struggle of the Congolese people against what the US imperialist and other media are constantly mendaciously calling "a rebellion" - pretending then that foreign invading troops are "not" since long the ones controlling half of the DR Congo - Hari's organization, the "Alliance Marxist-Leninist - North America" would now (finally!) look into, he promised on the list on 12 August. So far, no result of its deliberations on this has been seen publicly.

I hold it's likely that the very nastily counter-revolutionary, though laughably stupid, behaviour which citizen Hari was to demonstrate in the 'merry Murray "M-L" melee' soon after these things, in particular around that time when, as it happened, you wrote to me privately, Jim, late last Friday (GMT), had something to do with a reluctance of his to turn around, respectively to take a clear stand, on these two abovementioned political questions and oppose that which, above all, the US imperialists are so fanatically interested in perpetrating concerning them.

Now Hari soon, even the day before yesterday, on Saturday, began, as far as appearances went, to "cool it" in that "melee". But it would be quite wrong, on the part of actual Marxists and revolutionary people, if they were to "forget all about" those things he did write late on Friday - and so far has not himself repudiated either - when endeavouring to assess where citizen Hari really stands, in the struggle between proletariat and bourgeoisie in the world.

6. Can this present melee or "affair" taking place on the ISML list, in part on the (more important) PTTP one too, be compared to the international "Quispe" fight in 1996?

Yes and no. You wrote: "I understand you considered STS ['Sue'] to be a net phantom when she appeared on PTTP. As soon as you raised this, she disappeared. - The whole affair reminds me of the Quispe problem a few years back now."

Actually, the present melee is quite similar, in principle, to the one in 1996, and is bringing in part at least some similarly valuable experience. But it's incomparably smaller, both as to the number of forces directly involved in it and also as to its direct political importance - that's how I judge it at least. Also, it seems to me that there are no intelligence service forces of the ("big-time") reactionaries' quite directly involved this time.

Speaking of this, I should mention here at once to you, for instance, Jim, who also asked me about how to find earlier "UNITE! (etc) Infos" of mine, that not so few of them have dealt in detail with those important questions concerning the "RIM" (and in part, concerning other utterly phony "preparatory Internationals") on which some main truths became clear to many people in many different countries from 1996 on precisely in connection with the big "Quispe" fight in that year.

For instance, in the rather recent Info #121en, I made a summing-up (in 8 parts, with documents) precisely of that "Quispe" fight, directly addressing, btw, that abovementioned cyber ghost "Sweet Sue", although I by then (late May) was already pretty certain "she" was precisely a "ghost".

And no, sorry, I must admit I have so far failed to construct that which I do think I ought to have put together long ago, a website with all these Infos (etc) on it. I shall gladly compensate for this, as far as you and others who may expressly want this are concerned, Jim, by mailing you as many earlier such Infos as you may require. (And to you I shall now also mail a list of them so far - the series started in late 1995.)

In one of these Infos, there also is some brief mention of you, citizen Jim, on account of a certain conflict in 1997, your role in which I learned of only indirectly then (and would be willing to reassess today, of course, if some facts perhaps would show me to have been in part or totally wrong on it) - you may have wondered why I above referred to you as 'ex-"SiberiaSwamp Kommandant"'.

"SiberiaSwamp" was the designation which I on my part held, and still hold, to a be more suitable one for a certain mailing list whose main organizer and/or moderator, I've understood, were you, the so-called "LeninList". All information available to me then (and now) has shown pretty clearly, I think, that it in reality was a forum which had not a shit to do with actual Marxism and/or Leninism or anything like that but could in justice only be compared to some labour camp of the (former) Soviet social-imperialists' and social-fascists'. Concerning this, see one passage from my 6-parts 'Info #37en: To Jay M. on RIM & "LeninList"' of 29.06.1997 which I shall bring in an Appendix B in the last part of this posting.

While I've been writing this, I've also received a mail from Per, including a Cc of one from you to him, where you wrote i.a. "maybe he [referring to me] doesn't trust me" - since you hadn't yet got that reply to your queries which you're getting now; perhaps you were anxious to get such a reply quickly?

Well, as I already have indicated, I do hold it to be quite important, for all Marxists, basically ABSOLUTELY TO DISTRUST people like you, who on the one hand are quite particular about maintaining, publicly, that you "are" Marxist-Leninists (too), but whose stated line and actions so far have systematically been IN PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION and have favoured arch-reaction - in your case, Jim, above all quite directly the Russian new tsarists (and former social-imperialists) and the present-day ruling Chinese revisionists, at the international level, and all sorts of vile scum at the national or European level too, if I'm not completely mistaken.

I would like to add that in my judgment, which I can explain my reasons for in detail, those who want to represent Marxism should not trust Per either, as long has he continues to think and act as he does think and act. (That same last qualification I want to add concerning you too, Jim.) Citizen Per, true enough, does say, quite rightly, that the political line of Marx, Lenin and Mao Zedong is the correct one, as seen from the standpoint of the vast majority of people. But his actions, as a whole, so far (and in so far as I know about them) have been very opposite to those required by Marxism, and some views which he clings to and advocates openly are clearly quite wrong, in some cases, ridiculously so.

Now Per has done some things which I on my part think are or have been quite good; it IMO was brave of him, for instance, to invite me back (on 20 July) to his PTTP list, after he had one month earlier kicked me out of it, which was a quite unjustified action "motivated" by what others too could clearly see was a pretext and which some others (2!) expressly protested against too. And his contribution to the support of the Congolese people, after he got to know some more about this struggle in Africa, has been wholehearted and, in my judgment, an important one. But there are some things he continues to do which are ABSOLUTELY IMPERMISSIBLE, in particular for a Marxist, and, it must be said, for any genuine Leftist too.

This precisely showed up in this present "merry melee", in which he, together with me, became "the target of" much of that swinish - but totally weak and ridiculous - arch-reactionary howling in it, for instance on the part of citizen Hari, but in which he, firstly, by no means STRUCK BACK against and CLUBBED DOWN that howling with the firmness absolutely necessary in such cases - since such reactionary vilifications, in the final instance, precisely are DIRECTED AGAINST THE MASSES OF PEOPLE in that, to all, so infamous snotty "BIG BROTHER" manner tried on by such people on such occasions.

He was "not at all" defending me, Per on the contrary wrote, when confronted by the "terrible" accusation by an array of a few "ghosts" plus "real" people that he, on certain points, was doing just that. He even thought it might be suitable to "co-howl" a little, by ridiculously unjustifiedly saying I was "paranoid", on some questions at least - remember that same most vile and most infamous dung-throwing attempt by the Khrushchovite scumbags against Stalin (just to take one instance) by means of "just lightly" hinting at "insanity"? (Stalin of course made some real, and serious, errors too. And I'm not saying that I'm not making, or may risk making, any.)

And early in the "melee", Per did what I hold was the worst among these things: He called on me to "stop" pointing out, on his PTTP list, the fact that "Martha", "Sue", "Meia" and some other equally silly (some of them now "high-howling") cyber ghosts precisely were that, clearly invented and puppeteered by one and the same "old-time"-bourgeois idiot.

Such things cannot be excused by ignorance. One thing which I hold to be the most important and necessary condition for co-operation, on the part of Marxists, with people like you, Jim, and Per and also Hari, is that you DO NOT ATTEMPT TO SUPPRESS THE DISCUSSION, but ALLOW THE ADVOCACY OF MARXISM and the DISSEMINATION OF FACTS (or what are judged/argued by others to be facts) CONCERNING THE WORLD (natural-scientific such, for instance.)

What all of you people mentioned above have so far shown, to some extent or other, are SOME "BIG-BROTHER"-ISH TENDENCIES, tendencies towards suppressing the masses and fearing debate. This is very bad. The masses of people will not stand for it, and will VERY JUSTLY CLUB DOWN those who're trying such things on, as soon as that vast majority gets organized. Those who really want to act as Marxists must get rid of such tendencies completely.

Suppose that I or some others, by mistake or intentionally, say some wrong things? Suppose some others feel hurt by them, or by things in themselves correct but stated a little less diplomatically? What "danger" to the revolutionaries can such things be? None, of course. People who actually have in mind somehow to lead or contribute to the overthrow of the entire present world order, how can they possibly think they could or should try to avoid getting their feelings hurt by some "nasty" statements or other? Wrong things you instead must REFUTE, as well as possible, thus making them REBOUND ONTO their originators as BOOMERANGS (or teaching them the truth, if it was a sincere mistake). - On this theme, I could bring lots and lots of quotes from the well-known developers of scientific proletarian revolutionary theory too.

Anyway - to return to Per - I was quite happy to see him as "co-target" beside me! I think it indicated he has at least done some things right! Being somewhat familiar with the writings of Mao, Per will know that nice and widely-quoted thing which the Chairman used to say too about "being attacked by the enemy is good and by no means bad".

7. The recent attacks on you and me, on the ISML list above all, were really quite hilarious, weren't they, Per?

By no means should they now be "forgotten" and/or thought to be "just" some "passing aberrations"!

Such things are an important and always continuing part of the class struggle in the world

It's in fights such as this one, even if this has been just one small melee and perhaps will not even go on very long, that often some quite vital truths come out and some important lessons are learned

Here I shall tell you (Per, Jim, Hari and others) a little about the Thomas P. Murray "multiple poisonalities", hoping to give also "normally dead serious" people some good laughs.

That "awful monster/vampire multitude" which has recently descended on both of us, so to speak, Per, has consisted, quite in the main, of various "spooks" all "blown into life" by one and the same bourgeois person, one Thomas P. Murray.

It would carry too far to recount here every one of those (sometimes "small") things which I on my part have taken as indications of this, and which together are making me reasonably certain about what is what here. I can tell you at any rate that I happen to have a rather long experience in encountering this particular phenomenon, the "Murray Funny Family", which goes back in time to (at least) late 1997 and which has not seldom appeared in connection with various "Left-wing" political struggles.

As many probably know, "multiple poisonalities" are a not uncommon affliction in some parts of the USA, where there in some human bodies may co-exist perhaps half-a-dozen, or even a full dozen, different poisonalities, with perhaps different sexes too, one appearing after the other, and the one sometimes being in conflict with the other too. The emergence of the Internet of course has made it possible for those who wish to do so to develop such internal division and strife within themselves into a (more or less) fine art. Thomas P. Murray is one case in point.

Who is this Murray, then? Actually, it's not all that important to know this more precisely. Those who're interested in this of course could do some further investigation into the matter, based for instance on what I'm contributing below. This wouldn't be bad. But it would be unjustified, I hold, for anyone to engage in some personal "hounding" or other, of this person, Murray, on account of these "ghosts" of his. He rather clearly is not connected (directly) with intelligence services and is doing his reactionary stuff on a "voluntary", "private-enterprise" basis, with that bourgeois-reactionary aim of feeling some, if not "Big Bad Brother", then at least "Little Bad Brother" suppressing and/or deflecting power over other people, sometimes even, "with half or one-third of his mind", wanting to do some positive things for others.

Murray, as far as I've gathered, is between 40 and 50 years of age. He's teaching (or he was, in 1997-98 at least) at a certain institute of learning in a certain city in the USA. One of his subjects must be biology, to judge from some quite well-informed (and to me at least valuable) things which he recently let "Meia Dawn" say concerning the Lysenko controversy.Over the years, he's collected together a not so small treasure of knowledge on matters concerning Marxism too. He does "understand the world", on the whole, rather better than do Per or Hari, for instance. (You, Jim, I don't know well enough to try a comparison.) But he precisely is not in favour of the proletarian revolution. Continued dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, though making him also just a little bit uncomfortable and discontent, is what he absolutely wants.

Therefore, Murray cannot really understand Marxism at all either, which should be apparent to all who approximately do so and who have noted some of the things he has let his supposedly "Marxist" "cyber ghost" characters do and say.

Here is a list of cyber ghosts invented by Thomas P. Murray so far, with their respective e-mail addresses and including his own (as it was back in 1997), and briefly some other facts about them. That is, as far as I know about, or think I know about, this:

8. The merry Murray funny Net ghost family (so far, and as far as I know or think I know today) - in reverse chronological order as to its members' respective first public appearances, the latest ones thus first:

Name, e-mail address, "organization" if any	First appeared publicly (date)	Publicly posts/ posted to	Status, Aug. 2000

"Mark Scott" <Hantayo000@cs.com>	16.08.2000	ISML list	active
"Meia Dawn" <meia_dawn@my-Deja.com> ("Red Comrades Documentation Project")	18.07.2000	PTTP, ISML lists, newsgroups	active
"Jay Brown" <jay_brown@my-deja.com>	July 2000	newsgroups	silent
"After The Fall" <subgenie@channelvip.com>	June 2000	Activist list	silent
"Sue T Simonson" <progressivesociety@juno.com>	18.05.2000	PTTP, MLMTT, ISML lists	active
"Martha" <MarCrow@aol.com> ("Martha Rose Crow, 1210-34th Avenue North Saint Cloud, MN 56303-1531, USA; 320-252-4190")	11.05.2000	PTTP list	active
"Mr. Joady Guthrie" <jguthrie@lmi.net>("Eagle Alliance", <jguthrie@LanMinds.Com> www.tmn.com/~eaglea/ HTML/eagle.html <eaglea@tmn.com>)	01.01.2000	---	silent
"diatribe" <tkmeyer@negia.net> (later replaced by "After The Fall")	late 1999	Activist list	silent
"Comrade mart" <mart@sgci.com>	1999	PTTP list	active
"Caleb Hill" <CHill@hba.com>	Sep. 1998	newsgroups	silent
"Ian Sampson" <isampson@syd.auracom.com>	02.08.1998	newsgroups	silent
"Andrew Allen Walton" <revcom@hn.pl.net> ("Mao Zedong adherent, New Zealand")	May 1998	M-G list	silent
"Ms Li V. Trahn" <lvtrahn@ibm.net> ("Vietnam/USA/ Friendship/Coalitiom" [sic])	29.03.1998	M-G list	silent
"M. Simco" <msimco@softhome.net> (first(?) "woman")	Jan. 1998	M-I list	silent
"C. Masterson" <oriontec@prodigy.net> ("ORIONTEC")	Jan.1998	M-G list	silent
"J.K. Marks" <jkmarks@ibm.net>	Dec. 1997	M-G, M-I lists	silent
"L.R.F." <trinity@hot-shot.com>	16.12.1997	M-G, M-I lists	silent
"Andrew Allen Walton" <reed@hn.pl.net> ("Trotsky adherent")	Nov. 1997	M-G list	silent
"Roger C Phelan" <rphelan1@juno.com>	Oct. 1997	M-G, M-I lists	silent
Thomas P. Murray <tmurpat@sprynet.com>	Oct. 1997 (or earlier)	M-I list	silent
"Liam R. Flynn" <liam@stones.com>	July 1997	M-G, M-I lists	silent
"Noor Khan" <?>	?	?	silent

Possibly, many others exist or have existed, unknown to me. (I've participated in public Net debates since late 1995.)

Note 1)
Today existing mailing lists can be reached by:
http://get.to/activist
<subscribe-pttp@egroups.com> (appr. 94 members)
<subscribe-mlmtt@egroups.com> (appr. 19 members)
<subscribe-internationalstrugglemarxistleninist @egroups.com> (appr. 35 members)

Note 2)

The M-G list was an unmoderated list which existed from October 1996 on and was closed on 24.05.1998. (Added in 2008: See Infos #065en, "The panicky closing of M-G", of 23.05.1998, part 1/9 etc, and #066en, "Detecting some Net cops, I.", likewise of 23.05.1988, part 1/9 etc.)

The M-I list was a moderated list which existed from October 1996 on and was closed on 24.05.1998.

Those two lists mentioned above replaced an earlier unmoderated Marxism list ("M1") at Jefferson Village, Virginia, USA, which had some 2-300 members. The big so-called "Quispe" fight took place, mainly in April-June 1996, mainly via that mailing list. (Added in 2008: See Info #121en, "The 'Quispe' fight in 1996", of 29.05.2000, part 1/8 etc.)

[End of Note 2]

The "system" or "principles" employed by Murray in the development of the above can be seen in part by readers; various informations on some details or other, for instance what political standpoints the various ghosts have pretended to represent, I shall gladly provide by mail, as far as I know them.

I on my part am posting to those existing mailing lists above and sometimes to congokin_opinions, and to various newsgroups, from the e-mail address seen in this posting.

9. A brief glimpse from a much earlier debate in which Murray took part and then was directly referred to, in late 1997 / early 1998

How I can tell, with some certainty, that it's Murray who's cropping up here again, once more, is a long story, as I said above. Here just some brief parts of it:

In late 1997, Murray's predilection for multiple Net poisonalities was pointed to, by several writers to the then M-G list. There were also various accusations leveled at him, which I on my part to begin with found completely unfounded and repeatedly defended him (respectively his aliases) against. Most of them were unfounded too, such as the one precisely against his appearing under pseudonyms or in disguise (why object to this in itself?), or one about "harassing" others by sending "unsolicited" mails to them (those people never got advertisements or other junk mail, or what?).

Murray was being attacked, not least, by some writers whom I (already) knew were either nasty reactionaries or else, even, agents of reactionary intelligence services. They wanted to kick him off the list(s). I most strenuously combated ANY kicking out of ANYBODY, including the agents, from such lists - what better teachers, or "skeletons-in-the-classroom-corners", as I called them, could you have on a list than such people?

But it turned out that apparently, I wasn't completely right in this defence of mine of this (multiple) writer either. It seems he had in fact done such a thing, for instance, as sending mails in the names of other (actual) persons, in which third parties were being abused, to the embarrassment of the presumed senders too then. One quote from Siddharth Chatterjee on this:

[QUOTE:]

Comments:	Authenticated sender is <siddhart@mailbox.syr.edu>
From:	"Siddharth Chatterjee" <siddhart@mailbox.syr.edu>
To:	marxism-general@jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
Date:	Sat, 24 Jan 1998 01:11:38 +0000
Subject:	M-G: The Provocateur's Gender Change

The provocateur and proven forgerer in M-G now assumes the voice of a woman, "M.Simco" <msimco@softhome.net> who says...
..........

The forgerer recognizes and implicitly admits his criminal handiwork. Yes, "J.K. Mark's" forgery (which will be treated as a crime in a bourgeois court of law) forwarded to me by the system administrator had a header which I removed since it was not essential.
...........

In another post today from his alias of "Roger C. Phelan", the forgerer almost admits his misdeed (actually committed by "J.K.Marks") and tries to dismiss it off as a harmless prank:

>Oh, come on, Sid, didn't you like my little practical joke?
>I sure had fun. And I intend ever more such fun, forging mail
>from people and calling up their bosses and complaining and
>stuff like that. Lighten up, you guys; it's just the Internet.
>
>
>Roger C Phelan
>rphelan1@juno.com

To Hans Ehrbar [list manager]:

What kind of Marxist list is this where the forces of counterrevolution and reaction are allowed full play to defame, disorient and confuse by posting forgeries, lies and slanders against list members from a number of fake accounts [...]

[COMMENT: This I still today absolutely disagree with Sid about. Such things can do absolutely no harm and should always be allowed. Marxists who are not used to encountering defamations, abuse and massive disorientation attempts at least 100 times per day and who cannot, on principle, effectively turn such things into boomerangs by simply posting some suitable replies are more or less worthless, ready for the scrapheap.]

[...] while genuine people are allowed only one post a day less than 10 K to refute their false allegations?

[COMMENT: This then new "rule", of arch-reactionary suppression, I of course combated as much as I could, "together" also e.g. with several Murray "cyber ghosts".]

My suggestion to you once again is to IMMEDIATELY expel the individual who uses these aliases: "Thomas P. Murray", "Liam R. Flynn", "L.R.F", "Roger C. Phelan", "J.K. Marks", "C. Masterson" and now the "woman", "M.Simco <msimco@softhome.net>". That will be good start. Any delay or hesitation will be dangerous to the health of the list no matter what the list marxists say about "democracy". I had asked you to do this quite some time ago but you did not reply. Instead, the great "Maoist" Rolf Martens, expressing his liberal support for the reactionary provocateur (contra Chairman Mao) accused me of the sin of "Khrushchevism".
.......

[END OF QUOTE]

COMMENT: This last thing here I saw reason to apologize to Sid for, since this assessment of mine was quite wrong. Also, I came to realize that Murray had been guilty of at least some wrongdoing, precisely against Siddharth, for instance. I still held and hold, though, that these things at that time had not been very serious; they basically were pranks, even if, at times, somewhat unpleasant such.

This very small bit of "ancient history" is sufficient for some "basic background" in this present context, I think.

10. The merry "M-L" melee now, Part 1

In the below I shall show some of the IMO more instructive (and/or comical) parts of this present little "dogfight" on a couple of mailing lists, by quoting in full or in part a number of postings by others (above all) and adding some brief comments of my own now.

It started out as a "branch" of the "AIDS" debate, with some angry replies to this posting of mine which I'm reproducing in full here:

10A) A posting by me (to all lists and some newsgroups) in the "AIDS" debate, on 16.08.2000

To:	pttp@egroups.com
Cc:	Activist_List@listbot.com, mlmtt@egroups.com,internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com
From:	rolf.martens@mailbox.swipnet.se [NB, 2008: Now rolf.martens@comhem.se]
Date:	Wed, 16 Aug 2000 23:03:33 +0200 (MET DST) [or: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 21:03:33 GMT]
Subject:	Re: "Martha"/"Sue"/"Meia"/etc on "Orwell, AIDS Expert"

[NOTE, 22.08.2000, after this was first posted: I'm adding in brackets GMT times for the respective postings from here on.]

Hello "Martha"/"Sue"/"Meia"/"After the Fall"/etc, etc,

You wrote, to the pttp list on 16.08, subject "George Orwell, AIDS Expert":

["Martha":]
"Rolf: You surprise me! I liked some of what the article said, [the one by Martin Kaufman reproduced in my Info #130en] although I believe HIV is a precursor to AIDS."

This VERY WRONG and LONG-SINCE COMPLETELY REFUTED "belief" you, in your shape as "Martha", no doubt would have.

You probably are not going to tell others why, either.

You probably will NOT EVEN LOOK UP that very important website which provides the FACTS on this matter, www.virusmyth.com, will you? Much less, COMMENT ON it.

Now in your shape as "Meia Dawn", you did actually write, on the ISML list, on 10.08:

"Comrade Kumar,

having visited Martens's website, http://www.virusmyth.com/ [- it's not "mine", of course, but I was pointing to it], I was somewhat impressed of what I saw."
......

A little more scientific!

But will even "Meia" return on that subject? I doubt it.

The person behind your writings is rather well-informed on some matters of biology, as could be seen in some comments by "Meia" on the Lysenko controversy. These did bring some valuable information. But the "AIDS virus" terror hoax, no, that is probably a TOO "sensitive" subject for "Meia", for "Sue" and for "After the Fall" too.

Would you really want to put in doubt SUCH things which the US imperialists are saying, which they clearly hold it to be pretty important that people do NOT see is an utter hoax?

["Martha":]
"I have also heard there is a book just published that says Amerikkka is responsible for AIDS and corporations have much to gain when 50% of the African continent is dead from AIDS (like diamonds, oil and the end of dictatorships that quash US attempts to imperialize them). Does anyone know about this book I speak of?"

You should just do some introspection here, and ask "Meia", "Sue", "After the Fall" etc. One of them at least should know.But this is not important either.

In your shape as "Martha" you "must" appear to be very naive and ignorant, of course. You "cannot", in this shape of yours, even have read, for instance, these lines on that OTHER HOAX,the "virus created by US" one, in my Info #129en [Added in 2008: In its part 1/2]:

[Rolf, 13.08:]
"........
6. PROPAGANDA HOAX, FALSE PROPOSITION (RUMOUR) III., A "COUNTERPOINT" OR "DISSIDENT" PROPOSITION

Not long after the 1984 press conference mentioned above and after an ensuing massive international media campaign had started, about the purported "new disease/syndrome" "AIDS", "caused by a virus", "HIV", there also was a "counter-rumour" in some media. It said that "this virus" might be "the result of" "a laboratory experiment gone wrong in the USA", or even willed "biological warfare" on the part of the US imperialists.

The people behind this theory, or some of them, may well have sincerely believed in it - as have no doubt many scientists sincerely believed in the "causing" of "AIDS" by a "naturally existing" virus. But this theory demonstrably is quite wrong too. "AIDS" is NOT caused by a virus, whether naturally-existing or somehow manmade.

And the rumour in this direction, giving rise to a debate at that time on whether "that virus" had "originated in" the USA or perhaps in Africa, precisely suited that aim of the arch-reactionaries too of making people believe a virus was "the cause of" "AIDS". This theory or rumour no doubt has been at least encouraged precisely by those same arch-reactionaries, and it's possible that it was they who started it in the first place.

The reactionaries "needed", and still "need", a "theory" which is "plausible" also to those - quite many - who are, justly, very suspicious about the US imperialists and prone to doubt what a US government may say publicly, a "theory" which however avoids disclosing, and in fact helps hide, that main fact that "AIDS" is NOT caused by any virus at all."

["Martha":]
"Yes, condoms do de-sensitize the pleasure of being with another human being. It was very refreshing for someone to talk of touching for once. It is nice to hear about human beings talked about in a more human and honest way. M"

Yes, isn't it. As you saw I disagreed with some things in Martin K.'s article too. But it absolutely went in the right direction.

And I must say that you surprised me too, "Martha", by putting your - very welcome - signature to that statement in support of the just struggle of the DR Congo which Per and I have been collecting signatures for now and which will be sent to-morrow. Much better than some things you wrote last May, I at least hold!

Perhaps it's as "Martha" that you have some more actual views in common with me, for instance, than as "Meia" etc, etc?

Anyway here's a little challenge to all of you "multiple poisonalities" to write a little more on the matters of this giant propaganda terror hoax - other readers should not expect too much from you either, of course.

I'm repeating, to you and to others:

[QUOTE from my Info #129en, 13.08 - Added in 2008: part1/2:]

What are clearly all the vital technical details concerning the below, readers will find at the website www.virusmyth.com.
........

1. GIANT PROPAGANDA HOAX, FALSE PROPOSITION I.

Since the early 1980s, there is an international propaganda saying that there is a "new" disease, or rather, "syndrome", in the world, called "AIDS" ("Acquired Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome").

This is FALSE. THERE IS NO "AIDS". THERE NEVER WAS ANY.

The scientists who have refuted the lies on this subject and whose articles you'll find at www.virusmyth.com are not putting the above proposition in this way. I'm doing this. But they, since long, are saying what amounts to the same thing. Below in section 8, I shall bring several quotes from them on this.

WHAT IS BEING CALLED "AIDS" IN REALITY IS A NUMBER OF ACTUAL DISEASES, KNOWN ALSO BEFORE THE EARLY 1980S.

2. GIANT PROPAGANDA HOAX, FALSE PROPOSITION II.

Since 23 April 1984 - starting with a press conference on that day by the "health minister" of the US imperialists, together with one misled and at least in part fact-distorting scientist (R. Gallo) - there is a massive international propaganda saying that the purported "new" disease or syndrome is "caused by a virus" - by a purportedly existing such, since then referred to as "HIV" ("Human Immunodeficiency Virus").

This is FALSE. WHAT IS BEING CALLED "AIDS" IS NOT CAUSED BY A VIRUS.

That is, IT IS NOT INFECTIOUS, WHETHER SEXUALLY-TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE. THERE IS NO "AIDS EPIDEMIC", NOT ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. THERE NEVER WAS ONE.
.........

[END OF QUOTE]

Rolf

I hope that readers will not be too bored by the below "horror collection", which - OK - is pretty long too, but this just to show all what you must expect to meet, and be ready to counter, if you really want to contribute towards the clubbing down of imperialism, revisionism and all reaction in the world.

[Added in 2008: In the below, there will often appear some lines starting out with "COMMENT" - lines with brackets [ ] around them if they come in the middle of someone else's posting, or without such if they come after it. In both cases, those comments were added by me in retrospect, after I had compiled the whole set of postings, for my Info #131en, and were not some things which I wrote to the other participants in the debate, or melee, while it was going on.]

10B) "Sue"doesn't like my posting, replies the same day

From:	Sue T Simonson <progressivesociety@juno.com>
Mailing-List:	Mailing-List: list internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com; contact internationalstrugglemarxistleninist-owner@egroups.com
Date:	Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:37:58 EDT [or: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 21:37:58 GMT]
Subject:	Rolf the misogynist

To all:

This is not the first time that Rolf has gone off the deep end concerning women who contribute to these discussions. Now he has an illusion that 4 people are the same person (I do not subscribe to the pttp list any longer, so I do not know "After The Fall" but would be interested to find out what she has to say about things.)

In previous posts Rolf accused me, among other things, of being "in drag" which suggests he has a problem with homophobia, and he referred to Meia's name as a "girl's name" in an attempt to strut his male chauvinist stuff in front of everybody.

[COMMENT: I wrote it looked like a girl's name, but, "for safety", first wrote about "Meia" as being either a "she" or a "he", suggesting also it could be an "it". The "logic" of calling someone a "misogynist" just on account of his/her making some criticism of a woman concerning a political matter, btw, was equally ridiculously tried in the 1996 "Quispe" fight too, by the agent Chris Burford, London.]

This of course is an attempt to deflect the discussion onto Rolf's track and away from other issues which people consider more important.

Rolf, I have no interest in this phony discussion on AIDS.

[COMMENT: !!]

As far as this list is concerned, according to the rules, abuse and/or slander is not to be tolerated.

[COMMENT: My pointing to "Sue's" connection to the other Murray funny family members was no "slander", of course, nor could it possibly be termed "abuse". (And another thing I'd like to point out again [see above!] is that on a REAL Marxist list, you WANT there to be as much as possible of such things! Actual Marxists will always meet loads of such stuff anyway and MUST learn how to counter them, POLITICALLY, NOT by suppression - unless it's e.g. Nazi/racist, thus clearly criminal, statements, of course.]

I think it is a good rule, and I think that if someone wishes to spit in the face of a rule, not to mention spitting in the face of one or more of the participants, then I would suggest that a warning be given, followed by suspension for a week or so, followed by expulsion.

[COMMENT: "Sweet Sue" stripping herself of the last vestiges of those nice "red" clothes, and in to her very skeleton, as really one of those "'BIG BROTHER' SISTERS!" ]

In any case, I am making a complaint at this time. And I will do so on the other list I belong to.

Sue Simonson

On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 23:03:33 +0200 (MET DST)
rolf.martens@mailbox.swipnet.se writes:
............

10C) "Khrushchovite" "Comrade Mart" most heartily agrees with "Maoist" "Sue", writing on PTTP

From:	"mart" <mart@sgci.com>
Mailing-List:	list pttp@egroups.com; contact pttp-owner@egroups.com
Date:	Wed, 16 Aug 2000 18:01:21 -0400 [or: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:01:21 GMT]
Subject:	Re: Re: "Martha"/"Sue"/"Meia"/etc on "Orwell, AIDS Expert"

Well Rolf, I see you're back to your old stock in trade, of personal attack, name calling and charactor assinatination. You have learned nothing from your temporary banishment from this group. I know from previous dealings with you, that there is no point in even trying to reason with you, debate or discuss anything, in a sane, polite, or resonable manner. So, knowing the futilitity of trying to communicate with you, in a resonable fashion, I will put this in the plainest, most common, english that I can muster.

GO FUCK YOUR SELF!!!
mart.

-----Original Message-----
......

COMMENT: With or without a condom, might "mart" Murray mean? - And it's worth noting too that list owner Per, who earlier has stated it as his aim (in my opinion, a quite unnecessary and unproductive one) to avoid abuse, foul language etc on that list of his, so far has written no comment, negative or otherwise, on this posting.

10D) "Mature Martha" is puzzled but still not unfriendly - after all, I've been giving "her" a compliment by maintaining that "Sue" and "Meia" are really joined together with this, in my opinion, now rather better "grandmother", who among other things has recently signed in support of the DR Congo

To:	pttp@egroups.com
From:	MarCrow@aol.com
Date:	Wed, 16 Aug 2000 18:10:12 EDT [or: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:10:12 GMT]
Subject:	Re: Re: "Martha"/"Sue"/"Meia"/etc on "Orwell, AIDS Expert"

What do you mean, Rolf? I thought the article had a nice human touch to it and that is what I meant. I have my hands full. I am trying to stop a shipload of poisoned peanuts right now, plus I have to work my little job.

Martha

COMMENT: OK, stopping some (actually) poisoned peanuts is not bad either. But such questions, after all, precisely are "peanuts" compared to the dimensions of, the damage and mass murder daily continued by, the international "AIDS virus" terror campaign, which can and must be combated precisely by Leftists striving to inform themselves on these matters, to begin with. "Martha" too gave no indication of wanting at least to check out and try to understand the things brought by that website I had been pointing to, www.virusmyth.com.

10E) Some initial - still muted - rumblings from ISML-list moderator citizen Hari & others

From:	"ISML " <hari.kumar@sympatico.ca>
Mailing-List:	list internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com; contact internationalstrugglemarxistleninist-owner@egroups.com
Date:	Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:34:04 -0000 [or: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:34:04 GMT]
Subject:	MODERATORS REMARKS - A WARNING

I am at this point speaking ONLY on behalf of the moderators of this list - and I am not representing my own views on the specifics of the allegations on HIV and AIDS around which these personal assaults and thrust has been launched by Rolf Martens.

[COMMENT: "Allegations" - as if that most vital information on "AIDS" and "HIV" which I had brought, and pointed to where people could get more of, were some "negative" propositions.]

Firstly:
1) regarding Cmde Meia - it is frankly irelevant what sex this person is - we neither know nor care - But it IS RELEVANT THAT cmde meia has several times asked that the name meia NOT be addressed as "meia".

[COMMENT: "Meia" Murray had in fact asked that. But on 14.08, for instance, "she" herself, in most terrible "retaliation" against me, had written: "Rolf Martens"!]

The reasons as to why such an absurd flagging is reprehensible to ML-ists - should be clear to any genuine ML-ist concious of the needs for at least minimal security.

[COMMENT: Completely unclear to me, anyway. If I put quotes, might I then, supposing "Meia" were real, be "disclosing" to some intelligence services that this was "not" "her/his" real name but a pseudonym?? Or how is this "security" "clarity" to be interpreted??]

2) The allegations that four people - of whom two are on this list - the other two are unknown to us of this list - are the same persons is a highly provocative one.

[COMMENT: "Same persons" I never even said; no persons, it was.]

The (as far as we can ascertain - totally false) allegation reduces the role of any real debate on serious matters to the level of farce - So a person A is "debating-talking" in a note that other people believe is to a seperate person B - and all other list-members are participating in an honest belief that this is true. What more is this than farce if the A and B are the same person.

[COMMENT: To real people, the identity, or lack of such, of your "debate partner" is mostly not very important at all - the political standpoints, the scientific facts etc are what really matter. I on my part was quite pleased to use "Sue" as - a possibly imaginary - dialogue partner, in the vein of Galileo etc who often invented such, so as to present "pros" and "contras" etc. In fact I addressed no less than a dozen postings to "her" last May, after I had concluded that "she" was probably "just" a ghost - see Info #121en. (Added in 2008: part 1/8 etc.)]

Do comrades of the list wish to see their time, and their honest endeavours and energy - disparaged as a "farce"? I believe not.

[COMMENT: See my above: Even if you are just "talking to" a ghost (and to others at the same time), by no means does that which you have to say need to be "a farce". And I can understand the disappointment of others if it turns out that writers they thought were real persons are not that. But the question of whether some such writers are "ghosts" or not is NOT dependent on what I might think or say on this, of course. Nobody "has to" believe me; everybody must still judge for him/herself!]

ROLF MARTENS:
Please behave in a ML-ist non-sectarian manner and not in a provocative manner. It is my belief that you are courting "explusion" so as to be able to parade as a victim.

[COMMENT: And my belief is, that here you were being pretty silly, Hari. When did Marxists ever advocate "throwing oneself in front of enemy advancing tanks", self-flagellation etc?? Where did you ever see an indication in any of my writings that I were for such things??]

Whatever your motives are - please desist from this childish behaviour. Or else I will obtain a sense from the co-moderators and the list - as to our appropriate actions. All of us have too much to do to to engage in petty games.

Hari Kumar

COMMENT:

My motive was, an intention to give others a tip (on a thing which I perhaps might be seeing more clearly than most others, on account of my being subbed to several lists and also having some particular earlier experience with similar things). This "hint" might then either of course be taken by others as obviously false, or else taken into consideration as perhaps something to reflect on, whether it might be true or not, and, if it received some confirmation or refutation later, what difference that might make in the respective cases.

When I wrote on 19.07, immediately after the first appearance of "Meia" Murray: '"Meia Dawn" probably related to "Sue" and "Martha"', Per replied at once on pttp: "OK Rolf! - I have the same ... Hmmm... in English thought!". It's not all that difficult to see through such a thing, is it?

Your replying here with a suppression threat, instead of with arguments of some relevance, was really "wimpy", and quite BAD too, citizen Hari. Didn't I tell you in the beginning when I subbed to your list that I suspected you were quite a bit "wimpier" than you professed to be, concerning debate openness?

And you clearly did "suspect" that I now would say "I told you so!", since in one post immediately after this, you added:

"Cmde Simonson,
I wrote my own views on this matter just now. The principles of this list appear too 'wimpy' for Rolf. He has a choice.
H"

I didn't violate any of those principles stated for the ISML list. You did, with this suppression threat.

"Meia" Murray on "her" part was "just a little tired" of the matter, she wrote shortly afterwards, addressing Tony:

"Are you saying that Comrade Kumar and I are "imperialist plotters"? Look, I just read Rolf's post and am tired enough for this right now. This is definitely not what I need."

I certainly had not said or implied anything about "imperialist plotters" in this context.

10F) "Meia" Murray grateful for moderators' rumblings and "Sue" Murray's staunch support - but will this be "sufficient"?

From:	meia_dawn@my-Deja.com
Mailing-List:	list internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com;.....
Date:	Thu, 17 Aug 2000 14:13:18 -0000 [or: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 14:13:18 GMT]
Subject:	Thanks re Cdes STS and HK

Thank you, Comrades.

If anyone - including Martens - feels that I (and Comrade STS, to whom this concerns also) are imperialist secret service infiltrators who should be ousted I recommend that they would say it openly and clearly. There is no need to poison the air with these useless speculations where accusation can clearly be heard but not seen.

Meia

COMMENT: If I on my part had seen good reason to suspect intelligence service involvement, I would have said so. And exposed (or suspected) infiltrators etc I have always advocated NOT to oust but to PERSUADE TO STAY AS LONG AS THEY ONLY DARE, as, quite possibly, the most excellent "skeletons-in-the-classrom-corners", and having NO CHANCE WHATSOEVER of doing any harm. NOT ONCE have I ever hinted at any desire to get ANY member of the merry Murray Funny Family, for instance, kicked out of ANY list, on account of their familiness, say. I still want ALL of them to STAY, EVERYWHERE!

10G) "Meia" "not comfy" in the "more public" light of newsgroups, does not reply on any of them (I've checked), but complains a bit to ISML "comrades"

From:	meia_dawn@my-Deja.com
Mailing-List:	list internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com; ...
Date:	Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:57:00 -0000 [or: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:57:00 GMT]
Subject:	Re: Rolf the misogynist

An update:

I would recommend those interested would take a look at "alt.politics.socialism.mao" and "alt.society.revolution" discussion forums at Deja.com

I have been quite quiet about this - but I can't stand that this paranoid nonsense about "multipoisonalities" is forwarded to tens of newsgroups accross the globe. Why this labelling on the forums I don't even participate?

[COMMENT: Well, "Meia" at least was on some of those NGs I sent this to, and could reply whatever he/she wanted on those others too where he/she had seen posts by me.]

I honestly do not wish that whenever I in future arrive to new NG the first thing I'll have to do is to explain that I'm not a police infiltrator that poses sometimes as "Sue", sometimes as "Martha", sometimes as "Meia" and so on, to which this is seemingly resulting.

Speaking of experience, the ML community on the web is "little wheel spin and spin"; when you start a gossip about someone and spread it this widely it will stay with the unfortunate victim forever.

[COMMENT: Whether "gossip" or other things said about a writer will "stay with" him/her or not, that depends on many things, not least on what line that writer actually turns out to represent politically, by his/her present writings and past ones, over some longer period of time perhaps. If all that "gossip" of the most "varied" kinds, spread quite worldwidely too, about me, for instance, since close to 5 years now, had been "staying with" me, I would have a pretty heavy burden to bear.]

I usually try to keep my personal feelings about this or that issue out of these discussions - but this time I truly wish Martens would aknowledge that his behaviour has been unfraternal and arrogant and would give us his word he would not do it again.

[COMMENT: Well, here I am "doing it again". To be "fraternal" to the bourgeois-reactionary Murray is not very necessary, I think. And suppose I were wrong about "you", "Midway Meia", with your "Red Comrades Documentation Project" and everything, then I would apologize, publicly and on all those newsgroups etc too - I've done such things before. But if "you" weren't so nervous, you wouldn't see it as so "horrible" to be "wrongly" thought to have the same "Origin of the Species" as "Sue", "Martha" and some others, would you?]

--- In internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com, "ISML" <hari.kumar@s...> wrote:
.........

11. The merry melee, Part 2

11A) "Meia" asks me a question, still feels misunderstood but at least has "comrade Sue" to discuss things with

To:	internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com
From:	meia_dawn@my-Deja.com
Date:	Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:57:59 -0000 [or: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:57:59 GMT]
Subject:	Re: Rolf the misogynist

--- In internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com, Sue T Simonson <progressivesociety@j...> wrote:

"Meia - I think the proper way for Rolf to act in this situation is to apologize and to make a self-criticism."

That's the point I've been trying to make. I think we should all be more accountable to the others on these lists. We have our disagreements, but they should not result to personal slanders and behind-the-back-gossip.

[COMMENT: I agree on this paragraph, in particular on that about behind-the-back stuff. When criticizing or otherwise commenting on someone, I on my part have always taken care to do this to his/her face too.]

If you browsed through the posts we've sent while you were away, you'll notice that I've for several times tried to make peace with Rolf - I even apologized him. At one time, I thought it was me who should do self-criticism (this relates to the introduction post on this list I sent to other NGs and which Rolf said gave the impression that this list is "sectarian") - but Rolf seems actually be the one lacking in it.

As a reply to my apologies to all members of this list whose cause I felt I misrepresented - since I thought it was my duty as an MList to publicly admit my mistake and was an attempt to advance solidarity and fraternal spirit here -, Rolf replied with that post which ridiculed the entire spirit of my attempt with it's note on "verification and detection committee".

[COMMENT: No, no, that part was written by Ulla Natasha Persson, who - in contrast to you, for instance - is absolutely real and honest-to-Marx and who is the perspicacious leader of the Nobelvaegen Kommittee for Verifikation and Detektion (please spell it korrektly!) here at the street in Malmoe, Sweden, where I too live. At some later point(s), she may be borrowing my computer.]

I've the impression that Rolf has no interest to evolve or learn from others - thus far he has hardly ever replied to anyone here - and when he does, the comments are usually "you disagree with me since you have not yet seen the light and I'm here to bring it to you." I would like to ask him: is he here to debate and to learn - or does he consider this list as yet another where he can post "Unite!"-infos. (I don't deny that some of them are pretty interesting in some respects)

[COMMENT: Thanks for that last, "Meia"! Actually, my intention is to do both: Post some of these Infos etc and learn too. Didn't I expressly thank you, for instance, for showing me that list of literature on the Lysenko controversy, which I realize your inventor must know much more about than do - so far - I?

As to the posts on those lists -

[Quoting "Sue":]
"is it possible for you to copy and paste these to me? I don't have access to the web on this computer and a few times I tried to access those sites at the library, I was not able to log on."

It's the same post as here. I don't know at how many lists is it on - I saw it only on those two mentioned, but Deja allows mass-mails to many other lists, so thus I do not know, did not check. The impression I got was that Rolf is active on about every list with revolutionary content - thus I can't say how many people have read this.

Regards, MD

[COMMENT: I do hope you're keeping "Sue" abreast of developments, "Meia"!]

11B) "Meia" gets a little pissed-off at Per, and tries to pretend that "nobody can show anything"

To:	internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com
From:	meia_dawn@my-Deja.com
Date:	Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:24:53 -0000 [or: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:24:53 GMT]
Subject:	Re: SV: Respect comrade's privacy

--- In internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com, "Per Rasmussen" <pera@p...> wrote:

"Dear Friend and Comrade!

Take it easy now!

We are no party - yet - and we are not at an Oxford meeting.

Don't prove - you cannot do this on the Internet.

Show."

[COMMENT:

Well, Per, you've said before that one "cannot" prove anything on the Internet. But yes, some things at least it absolutely is possible to prove.

But your call for others to SHOW things - by what line they follow in their postings, by what ways in which they try to interact with others, to team up with them, or perhaps to criticize them or combat them, and to show, by your writings over a longer period of time, whether you are consistent or not, want to learn or not, can recognize and perhaps correct errors you make or not - this is quite good, of course, and is one important way for writers who're being wrongly assessed by others to show that these others were wrong.]

"My name is Per Rasmussen
I live in Denmark
Skolevej 22 B 4720 Præstø

"Tlf.: 0045 55 99 33 29"

Comrade Rasmussen.

Did it ever occur to you that some of us may have pretty good reasons not to give out personal details?

You may live in a country that is red to the bone if compared to US. BUT if you would live in a country where Communists have been locked to mental asylyms long before Khrushchev started similar campaigns in the USSR, (I know at least one lobotomia case) and where mock trials of political activists where they're sentenced to 90 years in prison for "stealing a candy-bar" or something similar are part of everyday life, and where torture and beatings of political prisoners is an ordinary game, and where there was once TWO Black Panther parties - other FBI's, other was real - you might be little more careful about what you're saying.

[COMMENT: I at least have never asked any writer, not those whom I'm saying are "cyber ghosts" either, to give out any personal details whatsoever publicly. I'm pretty certain Per has not been trying to do this either. By "showing", I'm certain, he means quite other things - approximately the same as I above.]

I'm sure this list is already monitored as majority of it's participants also probably are - so thus your call for everyone to give these details out is very unthoughtfull, and USELESS since it is the politics, not names, that matters.

[COMMENT: What "call for everyone" to give out "these details"?? There's NO such "call" at all in the quote you brought from Per. So here YOU'RE SIMPLY LYING about what he actually wrote, "Meia" Murray. STUPIDLY too, since ALL can SEE with their own eyes that you ARE lying. Getting a bit desperate now, huh?]

And imagine if there would be participants living in countries where imprisonment and executions of Communists are even more common than in America - like India or Peru, for example. If they would response to this call of yours, that would be their last post.

[COMMENT: That quite SWINISH lie of yours, ONCE MORE, Murray.]

And on the other hand, some of us simply feel more comfortable to remain anonymous, for various other reasons. WHy not to allow them do so? Since MLL has open archive, I've sometimes taken a look at it - and you've never demanded that "contracorriente" or "carpenter" would give out personal details.

[COMMENT: Now it's the THIRD TIME around on your part.]

(And by the way, to launch Rolf-type paranoia, how do I know you are not a foreign-based CIA agent, considering that some phony "Peruvian exile organizations" set up by RIM are active in Denmark? And how do I know this entire issue of addresses and others is not entirely a CIA hoax, and they're not really based on America or something similar? And so on.)

Meia

COMMENT:

So it's "PARANOIA" too now, miserable Murray-puppeteer? What was it your "Meia" just said about "lobotomy" etc?

But also YES, of course those addresses given by Per and me, for instance, in Denmark respectively Sweden, and the one given by your "Mature Martha" in Saint Cloud, Minnesota - on principle, some ELABORATE HOAXES with such things, in order to make others perhaps falsely think you've "got nothing to hide", are NOT IMPOSSIBLE either. However, there ARE ways to CHECK ON this - and your PRETENDING you DON'T EVEN KNOW this is one other childishness and further sign of your desperation.

As for agents - yes, experience shows that quite "smart" such have been able to remain undercover for some time, at least. But here that which Per DOES say comes in: The POLITICAL LINE of a writer, SHOWN UP over some longer period of time, will give others some pretty good clues as to whether he, she or it perhaps might be a CIA or other agent or whether more likely not.

11C) But "Meia" and "Sue" need fear no more; help is on its way, and in the nick of time! Here comes list newbie "Question Mark" (Scott)! (Who posted first time 2 days ago, on 16.08.) And he's not to be fooled around with!

To:	internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com
From:	Hantayo000@cs.com
Date:	Fri, 18 Aug 2000 07:59:35 EDT [or: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 11:59:35 GMT]
Subject:	(no subject)

Comrades, I am sickened by this assinine stupidity that has been perpetrated by ROLF. I have refused to read or even concern myself with his garbage and bablings. What I have read is intended to be disruptive and to undermine the purpose of this forum. Nothing he pretends to offer is constructive to our tasks to establish party unity or raise the level of class consciousness. Nothing he offers serves the purpose of training professional revolutionaries to be effective in the accomplishment of the above mentioned tasks. He personally attacks and slanders people without facts because he is a demogogic dogmatist. His intention can only be seen is to be disprutive and create division. I refuse to accept his apologies to Comrades Simonson and Meia as this apology will never come anyway. His intention is to disrupt therefore he will never apologize. I offer my apology to these Comrades and offer my vote to IMMEDIATELY EXPELL this agent of the "political police" or you have my resignation from this forum.

In Unity Mark Scott

COMMENT:

Yeah, now that's what I call talking, Question Mark! Such postings are what I really like on a list!

Now let's see what citizen Hari and the other list moderators will say about its contents and style!

11D) Well, Hari and the others don't even get time to chew on that last one, before tough guy "Question Mark" has heated up even more! Now time for the absolutely Real McCoy! The M-L melee is getting markedly merry!

To:	internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@egroups.com
From:	Hantayo000@cs.com
Date:	Fri, 18 Aug 2000 08:42:44 EDT [or: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:42:44 GMT]
Subject:	Boycott and Expell

[I've broken up the below tough stuff, written as one long paragraph, into some shorter ones, so as to make it a little easier for readers to digest. - RM]

Comrades, this forum is outstanding and there is much in the way of outstanding possiblities to change the conditions and contradictions we are forced to face because of the nature of capitalism. That is why we are here.

We cannot allow ourselves to be side-tracked on why we have entered into this forum, to establish a base agreement as to how to unite. Each and everyone of us, no matter how much we may disagree on certain points, do agree that our enemy is capitalism, we agree that this enemy must be thoroughly destroyed through violent and armed revolution because this enemy forces it upon us through its own nature using its fascist police and military forces.

[COMMENT: See - "violent and armed revolution" etc! Not bad, huh?]

We agree that we need to establish unity to decide the strategy and tactics to accomplish the objective of overthrowing capitalism and being victorious in establishing socialism. We agree that we need to discuss different possiblities as to how to establish this unity. We should also agree that we will never completely agree on every single minute detail, and that is acceptable, that is why we should conduct ourselves as professional revolutionaries that hold to the highest and most advanced understanding of Marxism-Leninism.

[COMMENT: Professional revolutionaries - quite right too!]

We must conduct ourselves as professional revolutionaries if we are going to be successful in winning over the masses. We must conduct ourselves as professional revolutionaries if we are going to be successful in drawing out of the working class the most advanced of them to train them to become professional revolutionaries.

[COMMENT: Yeah - nice encores of "professional"! You want to make certain nobody misses the point. And so far, I absolutely do agree with you, "Question Mark". No irony is intended in this.]

Lenin tells us that "The character of any organization is naturally and inevitably determined by the content of its activity." If we are going to be succesful at unity, if we are going to be successful at proving ourselves to the working class that we are in fact worthy of being their vanguard, we must abolish our childish and amatuerish manners, thinking and conductiong ourselves.

[COMMENT: "Amateurish", that is precisely the opposite of professional, yes. The intellectual capacities of your audience you at least are not overrating!]

It is clear that certain individuals in this forum [AHA! - RM] have no desire to conduct themselves in this professional manner because they are not Marxist-Leninists, they are not even revisionists because that implies that at some point they held certain Marxist-Leninists views.

[COMMENT: Sorry, that last is bullshit, "Q-Mark". Revisionists by no me