$36.12 donated in past month
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay FeatureRelated Categories: U.S. | Global Justice and Anti-Capitalism | Police State and Prisons
*Informant Alert* - Round 2 (please circulate widely)
On May 5, 2017, someone presenting themselves as federal informant Andrew Clark Darst tried (again) to establish communication with organizers he informed against in the lead-up to the 2008 RNC. His email is copied at the end of this message, in its entirety.
We are bewildered, dismayed and angered by the bizarre entitlement of the email. The author, apparently the same person who spent a full year lying to people to gain their trust, all the while sharing all the information he gathered with the FBI, dares to ask /us/ for privacy. He points out that our shining a light on his actions may damage his career options; ironic given the effect that being prosecuted for 'terrorism' and 'conspiracy' as a result of his betrayal has had on some of us. He bemoans having his picture out there; need we note that our own mug shots still come up almost 10 years later when you search our names?
We don't know why Darst would want to 'open communication' but, regardless of his reasons, we're not willing. You don't get to perpetrate deep harm against an entire community, and then entirely without invitation demand that those you harmed take steps to help you feel 'safe.' We are not interested in making him feel safe or comfortable communicating with us. The opposite, in fact: there is no room for State collaborators in our movements, and we would never take any action that might help pave the way for his return. When you snitch, you're out.
See our previous statement on who Andrew Darst is and what he did, here: https://itsgoingdown.org/fbi-informant-andrew-clark-darst-attempts-return/.
A picture of him is available here: https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2017/03/03/18796987.php
Stay vigilant, stay strong, and fuck snitches.
Monica Bicking, Rob Czernik, Garrett Fitzgerald, Luce Guillen-Givins, Erik O., Max Specktor, Eryn Trimmer
tcantirepression [at] riseup.net
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Problematic Pantry
Date: 2017-05-05 17:26
I have just recently seen your public statement regarding my email.
I hope you are all doing well and have found happiness.
I would like to speak with you all, but it's difficult when you hurt me / publicly shame me while I try. My first email was obscure and designed to test your response. I wanted to see if I could safely approach you. The response was not what I had hoped. Common sense says that it is foolish to continue to try. Yet here I am. Your public shaming actually has a profoundly negative impact on my life. I am risking a lot in talking to you. I have a career in which I help the injured, sick, and people in crisis. What you posted publicly may actually damage my ability to continue doing that.
Even though there is significant risk in communicating with you, I think it is worth it. I am going to give it another shot. However, I need a few things in order to feel safe enough to do that though.
1. Please do not shame me publicly.
2. I would like the conversation between you all and myself to stay somewhat private. I know this is a difficult thing to ask. I think it's ok to ask for privacy. (no secrets or state involved) Even so, I recognize the balance that may be required between privacy and transparency to the broader community. Any ideas on how to achieve this?
3. I would like you to revise and edit the statement you have put out recently. I completely understand that you needed to say something publicly about me reaching out to you. I can't imagine a world where you wouldn't. It makes me very uncomfortable, but I get it. Even so, I think there is a line between being accountable and informative vs.
being punitive and vindictive?
I am ok with your need to inform that there was contact. I understand your need to speak out against state repression and it's use of informants. Even if I hate to read it, explaining the consequences of my actions and how it effected you makes sense. I am not so keen on your insistence of who I am though. Do you know what is going on with my current "friends, loved ones and communities?" or whether I am a "danger" to them?
I could do without the photo either. I am sure you can relate.
I humbly ask that you please focus on what communications you think the community needs and cut me some slack as far as shaming goes. I would be very thankful if you did.
Here are some things I am sure you would like to know:
1. It's just me. I am not talking to anyone else about this. I never will.
2. I will not do anything to hurt any of you.
3. I am not the State or in cooperation with it.
4. I tried to go through [name redacted] as a mediator. I didn't feel it appropriate to contact you all directly. Now that you have put out a point of contact, I am going to communicate through it. Out of respect, I will not try and contact anyone beyond that.
Is there anything that I can do or say that would make you feel more comfortable/safe in communicating with me? It won't mean an acceptance of me. It won't mean I am making a "return." At this stage I am just trying to open communication without anyone getting hurt.
Let's try something different?