Armed words. Multi-language space of discussion, translation and propagation of texts of considered affinity. The editors of our comrades ParoleArmate are a target of Operation Ardire in Italy.
Posted on 05/08/2012 by ParoleArmate/ translated by Actforfreedomnow/sysiphus
That said, I would like to say a few words because if something needs to be said, you say it without constraints of any kind: this paper is light years away from my idea of affinity. First, I’d like to know more about this “decree for release”. How would you get it? Through what methods (certainly not anarchist), what necrotic-juridical steps?
At this point the question comes to me spontaneously: what part of antijuridism [our italics] fascinates comrade Stefano? Because it seems to me that he is demonstrating precisely the contrary.
Turning to the letter: as has always been said, criticism of the concepts of “federations”, “fronts” or “organizations” is very interesting from an individualist perspective and can sharpen one’s mind and one’s actions.
If, moreover, this is something one does not feel one’s own and there is a need to make it known for one’s own individual positions one does so, but to comrades and those with whom one has affinity of course, not the prosecutors, with them there must never be any dialogue.
But if as is written in the text, one feels no affinity with certain actions, why go on about them? This inevitably leads one to think that a site like Culmine was no more than a container, a press agency where an opinion or an idea was published from time to time, but which disseminated stuff with which there was not even the slightest affinity.
Another point is, as I had noted in my text speaking of the writings of the comrade Marco Camenisch, the fact of emphasizing the absurdity of the proceedings.
What do we anarchists have to prove to pieces of shit like judges and Public Prosecutors? What should we tell them (among other things through a lawyer that we delegate and, therefore, speaks in place of us)? Why recognize authority, if one defines oneself anti-authoritarian? Why make full use of rights when one says one wants to destroy them? I repeat, as an anarchist I have nothing to prove to anyone, nothing to say to anyone,
I claim my path that is mine and no one else’s and spit in the face of anyone who wants to judge me, accuse me or defend me. And I also repeat that a court is a pleasant sight only when it is engulfed in flames, not when some anarchists (especially calling themselves individualists) recognize the law (to judge you or make you defend yourself) and authority and use laws to show “their extraneousness”, or “the falsity of the proceedings”, denying everything they’ve done so far and retreating without restraint. I am proud to claim everything I have done (and claimed) until now, my activity aimed at spreading the seeds of anarchist terror, I am proud to shout aloud, in the face of that trash, Public Prosecutors, cops and judges who are nothing but enemies for me, that I support action in all its forms, that I am in affinity with, comrade and brother of all the untamed who deny static normality and demolish it.
Last but not least, I just do not understand why be concerned with the legal defence of the comrades of the CCF (and I was also referring to them when writing above of the indomitable) as they have made an anti-juridical choice which means the refusal of legal defence.
In my conception of solidarity, “solid support” is certainly not building their legal defence (which, it is important to stress, they have refused), but spreading their words and reflections and helping them to escape or striking those who have locked them up.
Tomo – ParoleArmate ______________________________________________________
Stefano and Elisa had obtained a decree for release, but a new decree was immediately issued due to danger of escape, so they are still in prison.