Translated by Act for freedom now!
source
There are times when the provocations of the free life we hunt for in this boxed world inevitably bring us before small or large dilemmas. If there is however some beauty in this world, it is definitely not in the streets where the hesitant crowd moves, but in the paths which unpredictably escape from our perceived field. The ambush and beating I got was an unexpected consequence of a decision I made and it was definitely an incident which hurt me. But words in here will not be consumed on this part, because maybe words are enough to describe such an incident, but are definitely not enough to answer it in any way. Remaining on the part of their text therefore, my desire was from the first moment to answer very simply and calmly to their claims in the sequence they were written in. I had begun immediately actually, a few days after the attack, and I had gone quite far. However, after reading their text again and again I simply couldn’t take it.
How do you answer such a delirium of lies without falling to their level?
How do you answer to fiction?
How do you answer to a text which ranges between paranoia, exaggeration and lying which even in the best case scenario that some of what they say is true, is probably about someone else they have in mind?
As I see their text again and again, I initially cannot believe how miserably they failed to understand some of the points in my text. The most noteworthy of all is that, without me stating it anywhere, they included, with certainty as well, themselves in the leaders of the prisoners which I mentioned and the most annoying by far is the matter of my position on disciplinary penalties which they translated as “thinking of personal benefit”, since everyone knows that the last thing I care about are disciplinary penalties and that what I wrote about the first 2 years of disciplinary penalties was basically that I sought it since it does not cost me anything at all (leave days and suspension of sentences is out if the question during the first 2 years at least). What is very clear in their writings is their desperate attempt to salvage what they can with the use of unimaginable and shocking propaganda. This outburst of hate with this prefabricated use of slogans for a person they know, reveals even to the most adamant, the levelling perception of these people towards any expression that puts them in the field of critique. Although they claim the opposite, the fact that they do not accept critique becomes obvious when, In their blatant tendency for exaggeration, they baptise my critique as slandering and insulting when the only thing that makes it differ from others is the deviation from the norms of the politically correct language, a language which theoretically they themselves are hostile to as well. A characteristic of their blurred answer, is that they get to the point of being bothered also by my anti-juridical statement, while it looks like they cannot believe that the informal (a-formalistic) organization is not some innovation which concerns only them and comrades abroad, but is an organizational model of attack through clusterings (not necessarily of FAI) which is being proposed for years now by many anarchists seeking, among other things, the deconstruction of pioneering logics of revolutionary organizations. For the “non-existent” they mentioned, comments are abound. As its known the CCF likes to “ignore” the existence of most anarchist prisoners in the greek territory for a while now. As well, the phrase “those who need to know, know what I mean” I mentioned about the known comments was obviously a figure of speech used for security reasons. The who are the editors behind those slandering comments is definitely something I can never prove in the juridical meaning. But there will always be more characteristics, besides a name, that can give away who is the commenter as in that case as well.
What they say and the makeshift scenarios they come up with are tragicomic. The historical document they drafted had it all. From conspiracy theories surrounding half of the things I wrote (the peak of which was definitely the theory that looks behind the purpose of the letter…. a trick so my trial goes well) up to the random mention of their history of struggle in prison. Here is, as they might have put It as well, the point where the limits of paranoia and existential insecurity blend. I do not think I have to say something more about them, besides they have already been badly exposed with their whole behaviour. I now believe there is absolutely no need to apologize for anything, because just as I never apologize to the enemy, thus I do not feel any need to apologize to a group of two-faced individuals with an anarchist history and the mentality of a herd. Fortunately the true comrades whose paths have crossed-linked with mine are not few (some of whom have crossed-linked with the CCF as well) and who can speak for me. Whoever has judgement can easily come to their own conclusions about the distorted reality they are trying to impose on others around their name and their selves. There is however in this personal anger also a deep-rooted satisfaction in the part of complete confirmation about their attitude and behaviour but also the emergence of the dirty condition prevailing around their revolutionary purity. It is definitely hard to make extensive analyses and find the deeper reasons of this story. Maybe the inclination to gather power was pre-existent among them and this was manifested as a repressed feeling after the deprivation of their freedom and imprisonment, as the only remaining way of life in a tough condition which demands if nothing else strength. This strength however can never be measured in comparable percentages of physical violence but to what level its combined with individual conscience and contributes to individual judgement.
To end, because the sick tactics of slandering from their side towards me continue in their attempt to convince other prisoners that I have called them snitches, it would be good for them to also tell the prisoners the opinion of the CCF concerning the population of the prison as they have expressed it in their texts. It is pleasant however to know that there many prisoners who do not swallow the propaganda of these individuals and have stood next to me positively. My choice therefore to write that letter if it could be considered a mistake for some reason, this is that I did not evaluate the consequences that could follow. For some reason I believed that even this group, who attacked me in the end, knew how to prioritize with elemental consciousness towards those across them and deal with them accordingly. However the consequences that erupt now I have to deal with. Right now, but also as long as I am in prison, I deal with dangers which fluctuate from a similar attack until my announced final “end” since this group is proving to be ruthless towards anyone who dares to directly dispute their serious image they artfully attempt to show to the outside world, but also ruthless in the methodology they use in order to exterminate me, attempting to turn others against me.
From now on for the CCF I will be “Naxakis the slanderer” since this is what some of them in there decided would be the best strategy which would quickly get them out of the field of dispute. A strategy which includes all the dirty tricks of this world, the same world with the same dirty tricks I hated and refused in order to become who I am.
Strength to those who think freely and dare dangerously.
Giannis Naxakis,
4th wing of Koridallos prisons,
5/2/14
