[New-imc] More personal attacks against me on an imc wire I am censored on (gutless)
mick lambe PARIAH
pariahnt at yahoo.com
Tue Oct 17 15:31:05 PDT 2006
It would be nice
by . Wednesday March 08, 2006 at 04:31 PM
if Mick Lambe was dead
- from Melbourne indymedia
_______________________
Well I ain't
-----------------------------------------
Enough of the 'mick' crap - our collective all believe you are biased and our collective have made all the decisions you people refuse to accept - read the darwin imc list and our minutes
Stacy Scheff''s (sydney imc) lies were just that - lies
-----------------------------
http://lists.cat.org.au/pipermail/imc-oceania/2005-October/002996.html
Stacy - " He (Mick) expelled the entire original collective, and has installed a new one..."
- Another lie. David, Mindy, Mick, Freddy, Viki and Fiona expelled Meyerhoff and Inder-Smith as Stacy knows.
- We even sent oceania/perth a video of our Aboriginal members explaining the situation here after Oz indymedia's paternalism became too much to bear."
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/11/98524.php
--------------------------------------------
I have never been expelled from an imc - I have never hosted hate and race campaigns against affiliated collectives or anyone else - unlike the imc's determined to silence me
Nor have I been accused of anything that has been proven - in fact the initial accusations against me were proven to be lies
http://www.country-liberal-party.com/pages/NAP_lied_to_Indymedia.htm
You are pushing it Nick
Either put up or shut up with your obscenely biased personal attacks
The personal hate proposal to dissaffilliate our collective made by Andrew Lowethal of melbourne imc - a person accused of racism by our Aboriginal members - failed
as it should have - given his obvious bias and abuse of process when our domain was returned previously
There is no need for 'consensus' to correct this situation - as we lost our domain without process BASED ON LIES AND BIAS - our domain should be returned immediately and then you can make all the proposals you like - you are to blame for the retaliation that has barely began
Nor do imc's that ran hate/race campaigns against us - have any fucking right to decide on our domain - nor you nick as you support their disgusting tactics
You are trying to get 'consensus' to break the POU (autonomy) - because your mates in Oz are now exposed as the racists and autocrats they are
http://pariahnt.org/Oz-indymedia/pages/asher_NZ_Aotearoa_IMC_response.htm
You are abusing process and our human rights again to continue Oz imc's longrunning campaign of hate and disinformation against myself and anyone I associate with
I don't take crap from liars, posers and racists and you support them
Now I see the new Ed Pol censorship that excludes me from comment - I am incredibly angry with myself for enduring the years of crap and hate from the sick vindictive scum you continue to support
So I have years to make up
You keep up your cowardly misinformative abuse Nick - just remember you started off with dozens of imcers attacking me - until the facts came out
http://www.country-liberal-party.com/pages/sydney-arafura-imc-lied_about_darwin_collective.htm
now it just some autocrats who ran hate/race campaigns called the "indymedia powers-that-be" - http://newswire.indymedia.org/en/2006/07/843757.shtml
and some of their gutless allies overseas in seige mode
We've gained support and credibility as the Oz imc's (and new-imc's) urgent need to censor comment and (hypocritically) change their Ed Pol have demonstrated
I have changed how Oz indymedia operates (a single honour) - and not one of the hundreds of activists I deal with has ever criticised me about it
I have to believe you are stupid to defend the indefensible nick, as unlike you I operate on facts and evidence
try this - http://adelaide.indymedia.org/newswire/display/13886/index.php
(perth imc member) "...for what its worth, perth holds no disrespect for mick and his crew. Micks a great activist and a true comrade with indig mob in the NT and elsewhere."
I see no praise or proof of your activism - nick
http://onemiledam.tripod.com
mick DIMC
_________
nick <sarsnic at gmail.com> wrote: Boud - an excellent analysis as always.
But I think we need to acknowledge something here:
How it is currenly possible, with Mick in the group, for Darwin to get
on the cities list? So far I have not seen anyone outside of Darwin
supporting them getting on the cities list without imc-process
consensus, and it seems almost assured that Melbourne, or Paris, or
someone would block such a consensus. So here we are making these
elaborate plans and putting time and energy into something that no
matter what, even if we somehow overcame all of our problems and put
together a solid application with Darwin, it is destined to be
blocked. I am not stating any personal preferences here (my feelings
about whether or not Darwin should be added to the cities list or my
feelings about whether I am happy about this impasse). I am just
trying to acknowledge what seems to me to be the reality of the
situation. I don't see the point of putting any more energy into this
negotiation with all it's complexities on an issue that is purely
hypothetical. Why not put our energies into something cool like
proposing a new set of global decision making guidelines - something
that might actually pass? Almost nobody involved in this situation,
apparently including Darwin, actually wants our help.
Boud - un análisis excelente como siempre.
Pero pienso que necesitamos reconocer algo aquí: ¿Cómo él es currenly
posible, con Mick en el grupo, que Darwin va juntar la lista de las
ciudades? No he visto hasta ahora cualquier persona fuera de Darwin
apoya su inclusión en la lista de las ciudades sin consenso del
imc-proceso, y se parece casi asegurado que Melbourne, o París, o
alguien bloquearía consenso. Aquí estamos, haciendo estos planes
elaborados y dedicando tiempo y energía en algo que no importa qué, si
nosotros superamos todos los problemas para hacer una propuesta con
con Darwin, ya es destinada ser bloqueado. No estoy indicando ninguna
preferencias personal aquí (mis sensaciones si o no Darwin debe juntar
las ciudades enumeran alrededor o mis sentimientos sobre si soy feliz
sobre este callejón sin salida). Trato sólo de reconocer lo que me
parece ser la realidad de la situación. No veo el punto de dedicar más
energía en esta negociación con todas las complejidades en una
cuestión que es puramente hipotética. ¿Por qué no puesto nuestras
energías en algo se enfrían como la propuesta de nuevos sistemas de
decisiones globales - algo que realmente podría pasar? Casi nadie
implicó en esta situación, por lo visto incluso Darwin, quiere nuestra
ayuda.
peace / paz,
Nick
---------------------------
[imc-darwin] Back to the JUDEN proposal - despite its rejection - another biased abuse of process [input] [input] [input] [input] "I still see no reason why Darwin imc should be deprived of its domain. We have seen threats published from other imc groups and individuals in the area to "block" Darwin's domain from being returned. I consider those threats to be unethical, irrelevant to imc procedures and process, and out of turn. It will come to a fight - a much deeper fight than any of them suspect - if they try to block Darwin any longer." "Darwin case has revealed that a number of imc groups "down under" are in violation of the POU and Ed Pol"
"Petros Evdokas" (new-imc)
----------------------------------------------
I see no reasons given for any decisions by Paris imc save bias - just an unwillingness to accept your Oz network's disgusting record of villification and lies about activists and their use of race/hate campaigns to provoke and distress people
There is no explanation for perth imc's actions in seizing our site and giving it to people we expelled
You are ignoring cause to address effects - that is bias
I consider that people who need to lie and abuse process to get their own way - are a danger to independent media in Oz
darwin indymedia operated fine autonomously and were vindicated of the false charges from the people we expelled
you chose to ignore that and instead supported the expelled people coming to our homes and threatening and assaulting us - that is extreme and hateful bias
you bet I'm angry - return our domain and keep out of our affairs or face an anti-racism campaign - because Oz imc is run by a pack of patronising white racists
you are also supporting this racism and hate we and other activists have endured for years exclusively on the Oz imc and are now censored from criticising
you are welcome to deconstruct my logic here
http://pariahnt.org/Oz-indymedia/pages/NZ-Aotearoa-racism.htm
NZ imc were unable to refute a single fact
http://pariahnt.org/Oz-indymedia/pages/asher_NZ_Aotearoa_IMC_response.htm
- maybe Paris can do better
I do not have to lockstep with you or anyone else (autonomy) - just abide by the POU your network continue to break without explanation
show us the process that removed our domain - returned it and seized it again
and remember what you are supporting - lies - racism and hate - years of it
this is just a rehash of a personal hate proposal again - Andrew Lowenthal's infamous 'juden' proposal - a melbourne imc member described as a "racist" by our Aboriginal members - it was REJECTED
"Any collective wishing to call itself Darwin Indymedia would therefore require, as part of it's constitution, to exclude this individual (mick lambe) and would automatically forfeit it's place as an IMC if he were ever to become a member." [1]
You are totally abusing process again
you are biased autocrats who cannot handle criticism after hosting years of hate, racism and lies against darwin activists
accept diversity (POU) and leave people be (autonomy)
boud - "It seems to say that the shared decision (however it got made)
was that new-Darwin-IMC is not functional at the moment and should not
have a domain name"
unlike Oz imc's that censor criticism and host lies and racism against their critics?
as our site has been taken down twice and has continually been without a domain for two years - while you did your best to destroy and intimidate us - I'll ignore the 'darwin is not functional' crap
Not good enough - why was our domain taken? Was it due to lies and biased autocracy?
Of course it was - and the evidence is available for anyone who can read - objectively
This is just more bias and an another attempt to get up Andrew Lowenthal's failed HATE proposal
"Mick DIMC - "We do not recognise any "powers-that-be" - that is
heirarchical and not what indymedia is about. If that is the reality
and innocent people must suffer it - there needs to be some change."
Cam quoting Mick - We do not recognise any "powers-that-be"
Cam - Ok, it seems they don't recognise you either.
Consider that an opportunity Mick. Stacy can be won over.
It may not be the way you like doing things, but if you really
really really want the domain back, maybe you would consider this
option.
There are many others that would block a new-imc application if you are
involved.
One of the most vocal, as you are aware, is 'and' (Andrew Lowenthal) from melbourne IMC. From my conversations with him, he will be allot harder to win over than Stacy is.
I would recommend you approach and_ and tell him you want to put things in the past and start again. Be nice about it, be humble."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't tell me how to respond to people who used lies, threats and assault at our homes and hate/race posts on your network to force me to be "humble"
For two years your network has tried UNSUCCESSFULLY to make liars out of our collective - while running hate and race campaigns to provoke and hurt our people - I'm justifiably angry and disgusted and the continuing exclusion of Aboriginal people is racist and inexcusable
This email will be censored on new-imc - so much for process
mick - DIMC
http://pariahnt.org/
On 10/16/06, boud wrote:
> hi new-imc,
>
> IMC Paris has written a message to the network on imc-process:
> http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-process/2006-October/1012-my.html
>
> Although it has several ambiguities requiring some guesswork to
> interpret, i think it nevertheless clearly responds to what many of us
> (not all) were concerned about in the new-imc group (and is more
> strongly opposed to new-Darwin-IMC in its present state than what many
> of us would prefer):
>
> (1) it completely rejects the statement, "Darwin IMC is an affiliated
> IMC and should get its domain back" and
>
> (2) it recognises the de facto reality and
>
> (3) it in effect rejects (in a psychological sense) mick from the
> network (this is what is stronger than what probably most of us would
> prefer in new-imc)
>
>
>
> (1) It rejects the statement, "Darwin IMC is an affiliated
> IMC and should get its domain back" in several ways:
>
> * It rejects the idea of affiliation/disaffiliation and automatic
> "rights" of affiliated members, which i think that several of us in new-imc
> accepted without wondering if the concept itself was being pushed too far:
>
> > That we are not asking for the disaffiliation of Darwin is nothing to
> > do with the previous blockages (these would not have prevented us from
> > making a similar proposal) and should in no way be construed as
> > justifying Mick's action: it is simply that we reject the principle of
> > affiliation and disaffiliation.
>
>
> * This comment seems to imply (in the context of their whole message)
> that dns should not feel obliged to give new-Darwin-IMC control of their
> domain name:
>
> > 3. As the attribution of the domain name is a shared decision, nothing
> > stops them from using a name other than indymedia.org:
>
> It seems to say that the shared decision (however it got made)
> was that new-Darwin-IMC is not functional at the moment and should not
> have a domain name, and notes that nevertheless, the group can get
> another, non-indymedia domain name (which in fact they did do).
>
>
> * This comment seems to imply (again in the context of their whole message)
> that they should be removed from the cities list, but that individual
> imc's can link to it if they wish:
>
> > 4. Inclusion in cities.xml also being a shared decision, nothing
> > prevents their supporters from making links to their site;
>
> It seems to say that the shared decision (however it got made)
> was that new-Darwin-IMC is not functional at the moment and should not
> be on the cities list, and notes that nevertheless, the group can be linked
> to by local imc's who wish to do so.
>
>
> (2) it recognises the de facto reality:
>
> > 5. As Darwin no longer has any connection, it is de facto disconnected
> > from the network.
>
> This is what some of us might call the question of "affiliation",
> though with different connotations. AFAIR, i did suggest that the word
> "affiliation" has problems due to its patriarchal origin. If Paris
> wants to describe this is in a different way, saying that new-Darwin
> is "disconnected" from the network at the present time rather than
> "not considered as affiliated", then i think at least the meaning is
> close enough for what we wanted for new-imc work: at the moment the
> group is not "connected", but with john and petros' patient help, it
> will hopefully get reorganised, learn consensus process, decide
> whether or not it wants to become an open, non-hierarchical group,
> etc., and thereby "become connected".
>
>
>
> (3) it in effect rejects (in a psychological sense) mick from the
> network (this is what is stronger than what probably most of us would
> prefer in new-imc)
>
> > We consider that Mick has no place in this network and we wonder why
> > he is insisting on remaining, given that his actions clearly
> > contradict his stated principles. We think that nothing can justify or
> > excuse them.
>
> i don't think they are opposing any individuals (e.g. petros, john m)
> from working with (or trying to work with) mick, nor are they opposing
> any collectives from working with him.
>
> > We believe that as
> > long as an entity of the network wishes to assist another member of
> > the network, we should not stop them.
>
> But they do seem to say that they are unlikely to cooperate with him
> as part of the network, and they don't expect him to heal like some of
> us are hoping. At the same time, they're not "interfering" in the way
> the IMC Cyprus statement talked about.
>
>
> So CMI Paris' point of view is quite different from that of petros.
> It's just that they are saying that Darwin is "disconnected" rather than
> "disaffiliated" from the network.
>
>
> i don't know if CMI Paris will come up with a clear statement about
> whether it's blocking or standing aside from the precise text of our
> proposal - this is one of the ambiguities in the message, which says
> (near the beginning):
>
> > ... This is a
> > collective response.
>
> but does not say to whom or to what question it's a response. It may be
> a response to ben (imc uk?)
> http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-process/2006-October/1009-hx.html
>
> It seems to me that what would be consistent with their new message is
> not to remove the whole sentence:
>
> | However,
> | we are acting with the understanding that - at the moment - neither of
> | the collectives with which "new-imc" is now working should be considered
> | affiliated, or have use of those things which are contingent upon full
> | membership in the IMCN (such as, for example, the use of a
> | ".indymedia.org" domain name for their websites).
>
> but to put instead something like:
>
>
> However,
> we are acting with the understanding that - at the moment - neither of
> the collectives with which "new-imc" is now working should have the use of a
> ".indymedia.org" domain name for their website nor be on the cities list.
>
>
>
> That would be clear about dns and the cities list and in this case,
> i don't see any problem with dropping the reference to "affiliation".
>
>
> i guess we should wait till the deadline passes (another week) to see
> if they are willing to respond to the clarification question which we have
> already asked.
>
>
> i should say that one way i see of summing up their point of view is
> "relax, be cool, use common sense and rough consensus, and
> decentralise".
>
> In this particular situation, maybe IMC Paris is right, and we may not
> even need another formal proposal to imc-process...
>
> Anyway, let's see in a week's time...
>
> solidarity
> boud
>
> _______________________________________________
> New-imc mailing list. Lista de correo New-imc
> New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc
>
--
peace,
Nick
freerads.com
nickcooper.com
houston.indymedia.org
somadocumentary.com
nickcooper.com/antipowerworkshop.htm
_______________________________________________
New-imc mailing list. Lista de correo New-imc
New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc
---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/new-imc/attachments/20061017/cb014c5f/attachment.htm
More information about the New-imc
mailing list