Greece – Athens -REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE TRIAL UPDATE,Session 16, Wednesday 14/3/12

Act for freedom now!/boubourAs

Session 16, Wednesday 14/3/12                                             

The session began with a statement by P.Roupa concerning the failed attack of the R.S. against the Citibank headquarters in Kifissia. Citibank, shesaid, is a criminal organization of the international elite, whichexpresses the interests of the richest families in the USA.

It isresponsible for war crimes, the destruction of whole countries, and thedeath of thousands of people. She gave examples from Peru, where povertyand destruction caused a cholera epidemic, from Mozambique, where by 2020 it is expected that a quarter of the farming population will have died and others. She spoke of the strategy of the international capital after WW2 to surpass some obstacles in the movement of capitals, which had been imposed with the struggle and blood of the people, in which Citibank led. And we, concluded P.Roupa, are called to be tried as terrorists and criminals!   They are the criminals.

Evgenia Drosou, a witness for the attack on N.Ionias police station, is another example of where terror-hysteria can lead. This lady, before the attack, had seen a tall man wearing clothes resembling Navy clothes, but with no stripes, walking back and forth outside her house for quite a while. She thought this was suspicious, spoke to a friend of hers “who is with the police” and she told her to go and testify this. When she saw the photos of the arrested on the TV, many years later, she kind of…. recognized Kortesis. Even though she had described someone almost a head taller than Kortesis, about 15 years older (she mentioned a man around 40-45 years old) and without a beard. Even in the court she didn’t hesitate to turn around, point at Kortesis and say: “he kind of looks like that gentleman”. The chairman politely disdained her: “I am afraid that your testimony is not valid”. Followed two cops from the Voulgarakis case, who were called to testify thanks to the insistence of accused members of the R.S. From their testimonies it was proven first of all that Voulgarakis is a major liar and second that the decision consciously created incidents, in order to support the attempted homicide charge.

Kanellopoulos, a cop of the antiterrorist force testified that he got the order to search the whole area which had visual contact with the spotwhere the explosive mechanism was placed, because the superiors were convinced that the explosion was carried out with a remote control,considering no leftovers of a clock mechanism were found. And, in a bush, he found a remote control with an antenna from a model vehicle, which was investigated, found that it belonged to a specific company and themanagers of the company explained, as is shown in the trial brief as well,that it is a precision remote, with a security against interference on itsfrequency. As soon as the remote was found, officials of the DAEEB showedup at the spot, amongst which his own superior, the infamous FotisPapageorgiou. He clarified, also, that the specific bush offered cover anda possibility for a getaway to whoever would detonate the mechanism.G.Ananias, handler of dogs who detect explosives, was also very clear. Hewas in charge of checking the area, before Voulgarakis comes out. His wifehad left before, but he never left before the area was checked by the dog. He therefore disputed Voulgarakis fairy-tale, that he had left, came back because he forgot something and that’s how he barely made it. “My opinionis”, testified the cop, “that the mechanism was completely controlled.

Because I was moving towards the bomb, it is sure that I would have found it; the dog would have smelled it. That’s why they detonated it, before I got there. If they wanted to hit me, then they would have detonated it five seconds later when I would be right above the mechanism. I am saying that they didn’t want to kill me”. With the interventions made immediately after by P.Roupa and N.Maziotis pointed out that from the testimonies of those two witnesses, two cops, is confirmed totally what R.S. in its communique. That is that the action was cancelled and the mechanism was detonated at the right moment so to not fall into the hands of the antiterrorist and with complete control so no one gets hurt. Not even the cop with the dog, who was not a target of the organization. But, the trial order speaks of a clock mechanism! For what reason? So that there is an attempted homicide charge. P.Roupa asked that the examination continues and that the head of the Antiterrorist H.Balakos and the department head F.Papageorgiou are called to testify, who have full knowledge of the real incidents. It is proven that we were right all along to suggest witnesses, noted N.Maziotis. what was written in the communique was confirmed. That if the organization wanted to “get” the cop with the dog it would have “got” him. There was complete carefulness by the comrades, Noted P.Roupa, so that no one except Voulgarakis got hurt. Advocate D.Vagianou, after noting Voulgarakis lie, upon which the charge was structured, she dealt with an important legal issue. The validity or not of an attempt.
This in legal terms means that from the moment the committer, with his/hers deliberate intervention, disrupted the act, the attempt is non-valid, so there’s no homicide attempt. P.Roupa, in a new intervention, stated that R.S. always took into consideration the area and the intensity of the hit class struggle dictates. The people who carried out an action had full knowledge of the radius as well as the dangers for pedestrians and drivers. In this specific case, the cop with the dog would have got to the mechanism. You would either hit them or you would cancel the action. The organization did not want the mechanism to fall into the hands of the cops; it did not want to hit Ananias, that’s why the mechanism was destroyed. The prosecutor, considering that the matter is over (neither were these two witnesses necessary, he said!) proposed to not call Baltakos and Papageorgiou.
The court had a small meeting and decided to refuse the demand to call them. Is pending the general demand of calling witnesses, which we will look at in the future, said the chairman. After that, began the examination of witnesses from the attack on the stock exchange. Security guard G.Mavroidatos, a young man with a degree, who speaks many foreign languages, was working in the company Prince Security and was on the night shift at the stock exchange reception. The security guards in the control room saw a van on the cameras and told him to go and check it, he thought it was suspicious but before the guards got a chance to inform, the cops showed up and told them to evacuate the building.
They kicked out the cleaning lady, they also saw the cops leaving, but they got an order from their superior Kokkini to remain inside! And they didn’t send them to the data room, an internal refuge where all the electronic data from the stock exchange is held, but in the camera room, which was external, on the side where the explosion took place! The organization, said N.Maziotis, put 150 kilos of dynamite to hit the stock exchange, warned of a heavy explosion by giving 40minutes and asked that the neighbouring buildings are also evacuated.
These people got an order not to leave. And the charge speaks of danger to human lives. Who put human lives in danger? As an organization there is no way we would put security guards in danger. The bosses however, consider them disposable. It is a lie and hypocritical to accuse us that we put human lives in danger. Others put lives in danger. And still, the charging authorities did not call the other three security guards and their superior Kokkini to testify. N.Maziotis submitted a demand to call them to testify. When I was in prison and got the testimonies of these people I was speechless, said P.Roupa.
The R.S. knew that there would be security guards and cleaning personnel, that’s why it asked for the evacuation of the nearby buildings. And they still left those people inside! Why? For the stock exchange. It is shameful that we are tried for endangering human lives, when others are the guilty ones. Seeing the reality, the prosecutor tried to make a manoeuvre. Maybe many people have responsibilities, he said, but this trial does not care about responsibilities of third parties, but only of the accused.
And then he threw his caustic remark: if R.S., by putting 150 kilos in a residential area thought there would be no danger! “It is not a residential area”, N.Maziotis corrected him calmly, and the prosecutor did not continue, but did not take back his “reflection” either. D.Vagianou noted that legally the prosecutor goes into the theory of equivalent terms. Which means that independently of the responsibilities of third parties, the action of RS created equivalent danger. However, the attitude of the security officials and cops who did not carry out the evacuation of the buildings is vital for the penal law. The “no matter what, people were endangered”, besides the legal matter, raises a heavier political matter, commented P.Roupa.
That is to say, no matter how many measures you take, you create dangers. No, the action of the RS has shown that it does not create such dangers. Armed action exists in greece before the RS and the revolutionaries always made sure there is no danger for people. The responsibility is on the cops who had been warned and had the time to evacuate all the buildings, where there were very few people. Aristidis Darlis was the janitor of ‘Eleftheortypia’ newspaper, who happened to receive the warning call.
He confirmed that they told of a strong explosion that will happen, about a van loaded with explosives, while they even gave him the exact location of the van. Because of his clear testimony, P.Roupa commented again that the location and time was given, therefore the responsibility lies exclusively with the cops, who put simply put some ribbons to isolate the area and did not evacuate the neighbouring buildings.
“Honestly”, she asked, “why have witnesses from only actions of the organization have been called? Are you trying to imply that on other actions there was no warning call? There was always enough time given for the cops to isolate the area and evacuate the buildings”. She concluded with the submission of a demand to call as witnesses all the phone operators of ‘Eleftherotypia’ who have received warning calls in all the actions of the organization, so every shadow can leave and it can be proven that in all actions there was providence so that people were not endangered.
Then came the turn of the capitalists. Eleftherios Politaridis, manager of human resources of the stock exchange, having heard the testimony of the security guard Mavroidatos, tried to make him out to be a liar. Constantly repeating that human life above all, he claimed that the guards had an order from the company to leave, but… they didn’t leave! “They stayed inside under the state of panic and maybe there was some misunderstanding”. However, Mavroidatos –who was fired a year after the incident- had testified that the rules forbid them to leave and that after the incident the rules changed.
When confronted by D.Vagianou and M.Daliani, the manager tried to avoid it with a desperate defence, but at the end when he was asked if he investigated, after the incident, why the guards remained inside, he… remained silent! Politaridis should be ashamed, commented P.Roupa. Behind this rule, which made the security guards stay inside, is an aim: to not disrupt the function of the stock exchange.
That’s why they mortgaged the lives of three people. A significant executive of the system consented to a crime. And instead of saying “we made a mistake”, he’s trying to make a liar out of the employee. This shows the kind of these executives. In the beginning they didn’t care and then, faced with it would cost their company with this revelation, they come and lie. Followed the leading consultant of STAKOR SA Michael Kortesis. STAKOR is right across the stock exchange and as the boss said they had damages of about 3,5 million euro.
And while the guard of the building has testified that he was miraculously saved, because he saw the cops and went and asked them what’s going on and they told him to leave, Kortesis blatantly tried to make the cops look good, by saying that the guard came out and saw the cops coming towards him to inform him. He was immediately disputed by Ioannis Skrekas, employee of AKRITAS SECURITY, who was a guard that night a STAKOR.
He described what happened in detail. No one told him to go. Fifteen minutes before the explosion, he saw lights from flashlights lighting up the trees. He came out to see what’s going on, saw the cops looking for the bomb in the trees!!!, asked what’s going on and then they told him “get out of here now, there’s a bomb”! If I didn’t get, I would have been blown up, he testified. That’s when the chairman, despite being generally reserved, committed the second big ‘foul’ since the beginning of the trial. “Casualties are also the labourers, not only the capitalists.
I am mentioning this so the accused can hear me”. He said. In other words, adding to what the prosecutor said earlier, he showed that he has made his decisions in key matters of the charge. This witness still works for the same company. This is why when he was asked his opinion about if the cops acted good or bad, if they protected him, he answered “Ask the cops if they acted good or bad. I do not want to express my opinion”. N.Maziotis noted that the leading consultant lied and called the court to decide to call the head of security of the stock exchange and the other three security guards. P.Roupa commented that the chairman’s statement was discriminatory; noting that he is trying to save the charge, trying in any way to get the R.S. attempted homicides.
But the court decided again that the incident was adequately investigated concerning the real incidents and concerning the warning from then organization R.S. and there is no reason for further investigation. This means they decided to not even call Kokkini, the supervisor of then security guards, who gave them the order to remain in the building. After that, D.Vagianou, according to the wish of her clients, asked that Politairidis is prosecuted for perjury. First the prosecutor and then the chairman said that the only thing they can do is send the minutes to the penal prosecutor, because their court is not responsible. The advocate in the end submitted a lawsuit against Politairidis.


http://actforfree.nostate.net/?p=9324#more-9324

Athens: Declaration of the members of Revolutionary Struggle about Stella Antoniou

freedom for stella antoniou (solidarity banner in thessaloniki)Anarchist Stella Antoniou has been under pretrial detention in Koridallos prisons since December 4th, 2010, arrested along with Kostas Sakkas, Alexandros Mitroussias and Giorgos Karagiannidis. The accusation under which the State keeps her in prison is the alleged participation in an armed organization. Initially and for a while, this organization was not even named. Eventually, and since it was necessary for the accusation to stand that the organization was in existence, the case of these comrades was incorporated into the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire case.

http://tameio.espivblogs.net/2010/12/04/about-4th-december/

http://actforfree.nostate.net/?p=8188

Stella Antoniou herself denies the charges and defends her political choice to actively stand in solidarity to Alexandros Mitroussias who was wanted by the authorities prior to the arrests. This choice together with her political actions and views are the real reasons that the State keeps her imprisoned.
She was arrested facing a serious health problem, which has worsened dangerously in prison. Those who have been detained in Greek prisons will know that even minor illnesses cannot be addressed because of the system’s indifference to the health of prisoners. The deficit is substantial in medical care in prisons and is increasing due to the economic crisis, making it practically impossible to deal with the simplest of health problems within the walls.
Stella Antoniou does not only have to deal with the appalling conditions of health care provided by the system. Every effort for an effective medical examination by a public hospital is wrecked under the weight of the police operation that accompanies all transfers to and from the hospital. The presence of a large police force, the usual expectation that armed guards be present inside the premises where the examinations are carried out, even when their presence offends the very dignity of the prisoner, are elements that make for a torturous process itself; it also makes it very difficult or at times impossible for the doctors to conduct the tests. The three of us have also experienced similar situations on several occasions and know firsthand the special treatment of political prisoners in these processes.
The culmination of this vindictive obstruction of her medical examination by the cops, who are of course under command of their political bosses, was the fact that her latest transfers were conducted exclusively by special anti-terrorist units (EKAM), who refused to talk to the doctors, and just called off the examinations. This has no precedent in any other prisoner’s case. The result of these repressive tactics of the State is that our comrade does not have medical tests anymore, since their importance has been completely invalidated.
The continued denial of the prosecution and investigation authorities to release Stella Antoniou — although it is widely known that her health condition not only cannot be treated in prison but is further deteriorating — is the culmination of vindictive state practice for political prisoners who are imprisoned for alleged involvement in an armed organization, regardless of the existence or not of evidence against them, regardless of their acceptance or not of participation. For, in this case, the authorities know that they sign Stella’s death penalty with her prolonged detention and continued denials of her release applications.
Our comrade deserves the solidarity of all struggling people, not only because she faces a serious health problem. What makes Stella Antoniou special is that in the prison cells of the regime she is a fighter. Despite her serious health condition she has never stopped fighting claims for better conditions for all prisoners. She never ceases to struggle against the very system of prisons. She never stops looking for an approach to collective action and struggle against the internment of people and the conditions this confinement imposes.
Together with Stella Antoniou we fought through open collective processes and together with many women and men inmates we organized and carried out a unique in the history of Greek prisons political mobilization against the junta of the Troika and the Greek government to mark the passing of the ‘mid-term memorandum’ in June 2011. This and many other moments of struggle in prisons are the most important political legacy that political prisoners leave behind during their captivity by the State. And this comrade has already left many such legacies.
Finally we must note that the terms of solidarity set by Stella Antoniou highlight the quality of her struggle, since it does not fit into charity molds and, moreover, cannot conform to mainstream and authoritarian practices of any kind.
For all this, a solidarity movement for Stella Antoniou is bound to have the militancy corresponding to her struggle and the massiveness necessary for her immediate release.
For all these reasons, Stella Antoniou deserves our solidarity; above all because she is a freedom fighter.
The members of Revolutionary Struggle
Pola Roupa, Kostas Gournas, Nikos Maziotis
[February 2012]

source
http://athens.indymedia.org/front.php3?lang=el&article_id=1374351


http://revolutionarystrugglecase.blogspot.com/2012/03/athens-declaration-of-members-of.html

en it - Athens: Declaration of the members of Revolutionary Struggle about Stella Antoniou

Anarchist Stella Antoniou has been under pretrial detention in Koridallos prisons since December 4th, 2010, arrested along with Kostas Sakkas, Alexandros Mitroussias and Giorgos Karagiannidis. The accusation under which the State keeps her in prison is the alleged participation in an armed organization. Initially and for a while, this organization was not even named. Eventually, and since it was necessary for the accusation to stand that the organization was in existence, the case of these comrades was incorporated into the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire case.

http://tameio.espivblogs.net/2010/12/04/about-4th-december/

http://actforfree.nostate.net/?p=8188

Stella Antoniou herself denies the charges and defends her political choice to actively stand in solidarity to Alexandros Mitroussias who was wanted by the authorities prior to the arrests. This choice together with her political actions and views are the real reasons that the State keeps her imprisoned.

She was arrested facing a serious health problem, which has worsened dangerously in prison. Those who have been detained in Greek prisons will know that even minor illnesses cannot be addressed because of the system’s indifference to the health of prisoners. The deficit is substantial in medical care in prisons and is increasing due to the economic crisis, making it practically impossible to deal with the simplest of health problems within the walls.

Stella Antoniou does not only have to deal with the appalling conditions of health care provided by the system. Every effort for an effective medical examination by a public hospital is wrecked under the weight of the police operation that accompanies all transfers to and from the hospital. The presence of a large police force, the usual expectation that armed guards be present inside the premises where the examinations are carried out, even when their presence offends the very dignity of the prisoner, are elements that make for a torturous process itself; it also makes it very difficult or at times impossible for the doctors to conduct the tests. The three of us have also experienced similar situations on several occasions and know firsthand the special treatment of political prisoners in these processes.

The culmination of this vindictive obstruction of her medical examination by the cops, who are of course under command of their political bosses, was the fact that her latest transfers were conducted exclusively by special anti-terrorist units (EKAM), who refused to talk to the doctors, and just called off the examinations. This has no precedent in any other prisoner’s case. The result of these repressive tactics of the State is that our comrade does not have medical tests anymore, since their importance has been completely invalidated.

The continued denial of the prosecution and investigation authorities to release Stella Antoniou — although it is widely known that her health condition not only cannot be treated in prison but is further deteriorating — is the culmination of vindictive state practice for political prisoners who are imprisoned for alleged involvement in an armed organization, regardless of the existence or not of evidence against them, regardless of their acceptance or not of participation. For, in this case, the authorities know that they sign Stella’s death penalty with her prolonged detention and continued denials of her release applications.

Our comrade deserves the solidarity of all struggling people, not only because she faces a serious health problem. What makes Stella Antoniou special is that in the prison cells of the regime she is a fighter. Despite her serious health condition she has never stopped fighting claims for better conditions for all prisoners. She never ceases to struggle against the very system of prisons. She never stops looking for an approach to collective action and struggle against the internment of people and the conditions this confinement imposes.

Together with Stella Antoniou we fought through open collective processes and together with many women and men inmates we organized and carried out a unique in the history of Greek prisons political mobilization against the junta of the Troika and the Greek government to mark the passing of the ‘mid-term memorandum’ in June 2011. This and many other moments of struggle in prisons are the most important political legacy that political prisoners leave behind during their captivity by the State. And this comrade has already left many such legacies.

Finally we must note that the terms of solidarity set by Stella Antoniou highlight the quality of her struggle, since it does not fit into charity molds and, moreover, cannot conform to mainstream and authoritarian practices of any kind.

For all this, a solidarity movement for Stella Antoniou is bound to have the militancy corresponding to her struggle and the massiveness necessary for her immediate release.

For all these reasons, Stella Antoniou deserves our solidarity; above all because she is a freedom fighter.

The members of Revolutionary Struggle
Pola Roupa, Kostas Gournas, Nikos Maziotis
[February 2012]

source
http://athens.indymedia.org/front.php3?lang=el&article_id=1374351

http://en.contrainfo.espiv.net/2012/03/13/athens-declaration-of-the-members-of-revolutionary-struggle-about-stella-antoniou/


Atene – Solidarietà dai tre membri di Lotta Rivoluzionaria a Stella Antoniou

da en.contrainfo.espiv.net

trad. parolearmate.noblogs.org

L’anarchica Stella Antoniou è in carcerazione preventiva nella prigione di Koridallos dal 4 dicembre 2010, arrestata insieme a Kostas Sakkas, Alexandros Mitrousias e Giorgos Karagiannidis. L’accusa per la quale lo stato la tiene in prigione è la presunta partecipazione ad un’organizzazione armata. Inizialmente e per qualche tempo questa organizzazione non è stata nemmeno nominata. Alla fine, visto che era necessario per l’accusa citare un’organizzazione esistente, il caso dei compagni è stato unito a quello della Cospirazione delle Cellule di Fuoco.

La stessa Stella Antoniou ha rigettato le accuse e ha difeso la sua scelta politica di solidarizzare attivamente con Alexandros Mitrousias che era ricercato dalle autorità prima degli arresti. Questa scelta insieme alle sue azioni e visioni politiche sono i veri motivi per cui lo stato la tiene prigioniera.

Lei è stata arrestata mentre aveva seri problemi di salute, che sono peggiorati pericolosamente in prigione. I detenuti nelle prigioni greche sanno che anche il più piccolo malessere non può essere risolto a causa dell’indifferenza del sistema sanitario per i prigionieri. Il deficit è grosso nella cura medica nelle prigioni e aumenta a causa della crisi, rendendo praticamente impossibile l’affrontare anche i minimi problemi di salute dietro le mura.

Stella Antoniou non deve solo fare i conti con le pietose condizioni della cura medica prevista dal sistema. Ogni tentativo per un reale esame medico in un ospedale pubblico viene intralciato dalle operazioni di polizia che seguono ogni trasferimento per e dall’ospedale. La presenza di numerosi poliziotti, la solita presenza di guardie armate dentro le stanze dove vengono fatti gli esami, anche quando la loro presenza offende la dignità del prigioniero, sono elementi che rendono questi processi una tortura; rende anche molto difficile o spesso impossibile ai dottori condurre gli esami. Noi tre abbiamo vissuto situazioni simili in diverse occasioni e conosciamo il trattamento speciale riservato ai prigionieri politici in questi casi.

Il culmine di questo ostacolo vendicativo degli esami medici da parte della polizia, che ovviamente sono comandati dai loro padroni politici, sono stati gli ultimi trasferimenti fatti solo con la speciale unità antiterrorismo (EKAM), che si è rifiutata di parlare coi medici, revocando così gli esami. Questo non ha precedenti in merito ai prigionieri. Il risultato di questa tattica repressiva dello stato è che la nostra compagna non ha più esami medici, visto che la loro importanza è stata totalmente svalutata.

Il continuo rifiuto da parte dell’accusa di rilasciare Stella Antoniou – sebbene sia risaputo che non può essere curata in prigione ma anzi sta peggiorando – è il culmine della pratica vendicativa dello stato per i prigionieri politici imprigionati per presunte partecipazioni in organizzazioni armate, incuranti dell’esistenza o meno di prove a carico, incuranti della loro accettazione o no riguardo la partecipazione. In questo caso le autorità sanno che stanno firmando la condanna a morte di Stella tramite la sua prolungata detenzione e il rifiuto continuo delle sue richieste di rilascio.

La nostra compagna merita la solidarietà di tutte le persone in lotta, non solo a causa dei suoi seri problemi di salute. Ciò che rende speciale Stella Antoniou è che nelle celle del regime lei è una combattente. Nonostante le gravi condizioni di salute non ha mai smesso di lottare per delle migliori condizioni per tutti i prigionieri. Non ha mai smesso di lottare contro il reale sistema delle prigioni. Non ha mai spesso di cercare un approccio all’azione collettiva e alla lotta contro l’internamento delle persone e le condizioni che questo confino impone.

Insieme con Stella Antoniou abbiamo combattuto nei processi collettivi e insieme ad altri uomini e donne prigionieri abbiamo organizzato e realizzato una cosa unica nella storia delle mobilitazioni dei prigionieri politici in Grecia contro la giunta della Troika e il governo greco durante la votazione del “memorandum a medio termine” nel Giugno 2011. Questo e molti altri momenti di lotta nelle prigioni sono il frutto politico più importante che i prigionieri politici lasciano durante la loro prigionia nelle mani dello stato. E questa compagna ha già lasciato molti frutti di questo tipo.

Infine dobbiamo sottolineare che i termini di solidarietà usati da Stella Antoniou evidenziano la qualità della sua lotta, visto che non è mai caduta nella carità o, più che altro, non si è conformata al consueto e a pratiche autoritarie di qualsiasi tipo.

Per tutto ciò, un movimento di solidarietà per Stella Antoniou è legato ad avere una militanza corrispondente alla sua lotta e alla solidità necessaria per il suo rilascio immediato.

Per tutte queste ragioni, Stella Antoniou merita la nostra solidarietà; soprattutto perché è una combattente per la libertà.

I membri di Lotta Rivoluzionaria

Pola Roupa, Kostas Gournas, Nikos Maziotis

[Febbraio 2012]

http://culmine.noblogs.org/2012/03/14/atene-solidarieta-dai-tre-membri-di-lotta-rivoluzionaria-a-stella-antoniou/#more-14616

REFUSAL OF THE APPEALS COURT

REFUSAL OF THE APPEALS COURT
I’m in prison because i am a revolutionary and fight agaisnt the modern criminal regime.
I do not recognize the charges that theu put on me and I have nothing to apologize for.
Revolutionary Struggle is a revolutionary organization and I am part of it.
Terrorist are all those that for the existing regime of representative democracy, capitalism and market economy.
POLA ROUPA

As a member of Revolutionary Stryggle I refuse to attend the court of appeals in Athens.
I do not accept any interrogation, either from the torturers of the anti-terrprist police or from the appointed servants of the regime.
KOSTA GOURNAS.


Members of Revolutionary Struugle

DÉCLARATION ORALE DE POLA ROUPA, AU PROCÈS DE LUTTE RÉVOLUTIONNAIRE (24/10/11)

En premier lieu, sur la principale mise en examen dont vous nous accusez, elle stipule que nous avons mis en place une «organisation terroriste», avec laquelle «nous visions l’ordre social établi du pays, et nous voulions le renverser ou du moins que nous voulions sa déchéance». J’aimerais revenir sur ce point. D’elle-même cette accusation est la plus grande preuve qu’il s’agit bien là d’un procès politique. Il n’y a pas de meilleure confession qu’il s’agit là d’un groupe armé qui se tourne contre le régime, contre l’ordre social de ce régime. Cette accusation est en soi un aveu que nous sommes des sujets politiques, que nos objectifs étaient politiques, et que les activités de notre groupe étaient purement politiques.

Mais vous n’admettez pas que nous sommes une organisation politique, parce qu’en fait ce serait un aveu indirect qu’il y a un contrepoids politique dans ce système. A savoir que Lutte Révolutionnaire est une organisation politique qui prône un autre type de société. Un autre type d’organisation sociale, politique et économique. La reconnaissance que vous ayez face à vous des adversaires politiques, serait en fait la reconnaissance qu’au sein de cette société, de ce système que vous servez, il y a des gens qui luttent, qui voient, qui prônent, qui recherchent un autre type d’organisation sociale.

Ce seul fait serait un coup porté à votre régime. Le régime que vous servez. Vous de l’autre côté, vous voulez montrer que ce régime est une voie à sens unique. A savoir, qu’il n’y a pas de vie en dehors de ce système. Qu’il n’y a pas de vie en dehors de cette société. Vous voulez nous convaincre que tout combat pour nous libérer de cette situation sociale, toute tentative est désastreuse. Vous voulez nous persuader que l’existence d’une société sans État, sans administrateurs ni administrés est impossible. Vous voulez nous convaincre que l’existence d’une société sans maîtres ni esclaves est impossible. Vous voulez nous persuader qu’il est impossible qu’une société existe sans riches et sans pauvres. Tout ceci, bien sûr, repose sur une base politique et théorique. Nous le savons. Il y a eu des théoriciens tels que Malthus et Adam Smith, il y en a eu beaucoup à travers toute l’histoire du système capitaliste que vous servez, lesquels ont théorisé l’existence de la pauvreté, ils ont théorisé qu’il est impossible à la société d’exister en dehors des divisions sociales. Lire la suite »

http://fr.contrainfo.espiv.net/2012/03/04/declaration-orale-de-pola-roupa-au-proces-de-la-lutte-revolutionnaire-241011/#more-3607

Athens -TWO-DAY EVENT-DISCUSSION POLYTECHNIC THURSDAY MARCH 8, 18.00 THEMATIC: THE ACTION OF THE ORGANIZATION REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE

DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE AND STRUGGLE

THURSDAY MARCH 8, 18.00 THEMATIC: THE ACTION OF THE ORGANIZATION REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE SPEAKERS: P.ROUPA, N.MAZIOTIS, K.GOURNAS ALSO INTERVENING: CH.TSIGARIDAS, A.SIRINIDIS

Athen: Prozess gegen Revolutionärer Kampf – Gewidmet an Lambros Foundas

Erklärung der Mitglieder vom Revolutionärern Kampf vom 6. Februar 2012, bezüglich der bewaffneten Auseinandersetzung in Dafni, bei welcher Lambros Foundas im Kampf mit der Polizei getötet wurde.

Die repressive Operation gegen „Epanastatikos Agonas/Revolutionärer Kampf“ (Revolutionary Struggle) begann mit einer bewaffneten Auseinandersetzung in Dafni (Stadtteil von Athen) am 10. März 2010, während der unser Genosse Lambros Foundas im Kampf mit den Polizisten Andreas Haskis und Theodoros Koumarapis getötet wurde.


http://www.abc-berlin.net/tag/revolutionary-struggle
http://lambrosfountasisoneofus.blogspot.com/

Trotz der Tatsache, dass dieser Vorfall der Ausgangspunkt für die Ermittlungen waren, die in unseren Verhaftungen resultierten, wurden die beiden polizeilichen Mörder von Lambros Foundas von Staatsanwalt Makropoulos nicht als Zeugen in diesem Prozess vorgeladen, der als Zeuge lediglich die Besitzerin des Wagens lud, den die Genossen versucht hatten zu enteignen, mit der Absicht, ihn in einer Aktion der Organisation zu benutzen.

Es ist offensichtlich, dass die beiden Polizisten nur deswegen nicht von den juristischen Autoritäten vor Gericht geladen wurden, um sie zu beschützen, dadurch zeigt sich, wie wir schon zuvor gesagt haben, die Verschmelzung der juristischen und polizeilichen Behörden. Es ist offensichtlich, dass der Ankläger versucht, die Mörder von Lambros Foundas zu beschützen. Dies überrascht uns nicht. Genausowenig überrascht uns die Tatsache, dass die Umstände der Ermordung von Lambros Foundas nicht untersucht wurden und kein Richter sie untersuchen wird. Die Rolle der Richter, genauso wie die dieses Gerichts natürlich, ist es, die Klasseninteressen der Bosse, der Reichen und ihrer Lakaien und Bodyguards, welche die Polizisten sind, zu beschützen.

Und hier zeigt sich die Heuchelei der staatlichen Gerechtigkeit, denn wenn Richter und andere Funktionsträger des Regimes über den Wert des menschlichen Lebens reden, meinen sie ausschließlich die Leben derjenigen ihrer eigenen Klasse und derer, die ihr dienen, das heißt, diejenigen, welche die ökonomische und politische Macht innehaben, und diejenigen, die sie beschützen, mit anderen Worten die Polizisten.

Für die Richter und dieses Gericht ist das Leben von Strolchen und der Leibgarde des Regimes wertvoll, wie etwa das [der Bullen] Mantzounis, Margellos, Stamos, aller, die trainiert und bezahlt werden, um zu verletzen, foltern und töten. Und noch wertvoller für dieses Gericht ist das Leben von Individuen wie dem im Volk verhassten ehemaligen Minister für Öffentliche Ordnung Voulgarakis. Der Wert eines Menschenlebens misst sich für die Klassen- „Gerechtigkeit“ unter dem Kriterium der Klassenstellung eines jeden von uns. Bemisst sich daran, ob es der Macht und dem verbrecherischen Regime, das Kapitalismus und Marktwirtschaft genannt wird dient.

Lambros Foundas wird in Erinnerung bleiben als ein Freiheitskämpfer, welcher sein Leben in der Vorbereitung eines weiteren Schlags des Revolutionären Kampfes gegen das Regime gegeben hat.

Er gab sein Leben, damit die Okkupation der griechischen Regierung, des IWF, der EZB und der EU sich nicht durchsetzt; damit die moderne Junta des Staates und des Kapitals sich nicht durchsetzt; damit der neue Totalitarismus, welchen die ökonomische und politische Elite weltweit unter dem Vorwand der globalen Finanzkrise einrichten möchte, sich nicht durchsetzt. Lambros Foundas gab sein Leben kämpfend, damit die Krise zu einer Chance der Sozialen Revolution wird.

Hingegen werden die Mörder von Lambros Foundas, Andreas Haskis und Theodoros Koumarapis, als Söldner und Mitglieder eines Apparats von Mördern in die Geschichte eingehen. Sie werden in die Geschichte eingehen als Strohmänner eines ungerechten und verbrecherischen Regimes, Strohmänner und Lakaien derjenigen, die das Volk berauben, unterdrücken und ausbeuten.

Genauso wie dieses Gericht in die Geschichte eingehen wird, als ein Sondergericht, welches über Revolutionäre und Kämpfer urteilt, die für die Zerstörung des Kapitalismus und des Staates kämpfen, als eine Gericht, welches die Verräter des Volkes repräsentiert, die zeitgenössischen Kollaborateure, welche im Dienst der supranationalen ökonomischen Elite stehen.

Als Mitglieder des Revolutionären Kampfs haben wir die Verpflichtung, Lambros Foundas vor diesem Gericht des Klassenfeinds zu verteidigen. Abgesehen davon, war die Übernahme der politischen Verantwortung für unsere Mitgliedschaft im Revolutionären Kampf eine Selbstverständlichkeit, nicht nur um unsere Organisation zu verteidigen, sondern auch um unseren Genossen zu verteidigen.

Für uns, seine Genossen im Revolutionären Kampf, ist Lambros Foundas nicht gestorben. Er ist in unserem Blut und der Luft, die wir als Kämpfer atmen. Er ist in unseren Ziele und Absichten. Er ist eins mit unserer Organisation und unserem Kampfes. Jeden Tag, jeden Moment, ist er anwesend. ER IST UNSTERBLICH.

Die Mitglieder vom Revolutionären Kampf
Pola Roupa, Kostas Gournas, Nikos Maziotis

http://www.abc-berlin.net/athen-prozess-gegen-revolutionaerer-kampf-gewidmet-an-lambros-foundas

Aggiornamento sul processo a Lotta Rivoluzionaria, 06-02-2012

La passione per la libertà è più forte di tutte le vostre prigioni


Tredicesima udienza, 06-02-2012
La testimone Mattheou, residente a Dafni, era la proprietaria dell’auto su cui Lambros Foundas venne ucciso dai poliziotti. La donna, ovviamente, non ha potuto testimoniare nulla. Lei venne a sapere dell’incidente dalla televisione. Non ha neanche sentito i colpi di pistola. Non ha neanche ricordato se la sua macchina, che ha visto dopo un anno e mezzo, avesse due o tre fori di proiettile.

Della scena a Dafni, ha commentato N. Maziotis, l’accusa ha convocato solo questo testimone e non i due poliziotti coinvolti nell’omicidio di Lambros Foundas. Non ha convocato gli assassini, ovviamente per motivi di protezione. Questo comportamento non ci sorprende, ha continuato. Il ruolo della corte è di proteggere gli scagnozzi del sistema. Il valore della vita e della giustizia è rapportato alla stato di classe. Voi proteggete solo quelli come voi. Lambros Foundas rimarrà nella storia come combattente. Ha perso la vita combattendo per il cambiamento della società, quindi la crisi diventa la causa della rivoluzione sociale. E’ nostro compito difendere Lambros Foundas. Lui non è morto. E’ presente e immortale.

Questo giorno è particolarmente importante per noi cosi come per l’organizzazione, ha continuato P. Roupa. Parleremo del nostro compagno, per noi lui è ancora vivo. Lambros Foundas è “caduto” durante una precisa scelta dell’organizzazione. Lui è un simbolo della resistenza e dell’imminente rivoluzione sociale.

La testimone Vagou, proprietaria di un appartamento ad Ano Patissia, ha citato un tale Mantalozis che ha affittato l’appartamento, con il suo documento di identità. Quando ad un certo punto delle tasse comunali rimasero non pagate, lei guardò nella rubrica, trovato il Mantalozis, lui disse di non essere coinvolto, e lei capì che qualcosa non andava, fin quando lui le disse che sarebbe andato alla polizia. Lei potè entrare nell’appartamento solo 6 mesi dopo l’intervento della polizia e trovò tutto annerito per il tentativo di trovare impronte. Le dissero che non avevano trovato nulla. La testimone ha insistito nel dire che non riconosce alcuno degli accusati.

La testimone Fili affittò un appartamento a Kipseli a un gentiluomo, un ragazzo molto educato. Quando potè rientrare nell’appartamento trovò un casino fatto dalla polizia. “E’ fortunata che non siamo riusciti a prenderci anche i muri…”, le venne detto dai poliziotti.

Il testimone Stamos ha lavorato nell’antisommossa al ministero della cultura, colpito con armi da fuoco da L.R. L’unica cosa che ricorda è che c’erano due persone che indossavano caschi o cappucci. Non ha potuto dare descrizioni specifiche.

Riguardo all’attacco al ministero della cultura dobbiamo dire alcune cose, ha detto P. Roupa. La scelta fu molto specifica. I “khakis” dovevano essere colpiti.

Essi sono i più violenti delle forze repressive e sono responsabili degli infami pestaggi di molta gente. Queste forze si allenano duramente, ha detto, aggiungendo che anche lei ha subito tali violenze. E ovviamente, i loro superiori politici lo sanno. Ha menzionato casi di tortura, pestaggi dei prigionieri, anche minorenni; per concludere che questa è una forza socialmente degradata che fa la guardia a un sistema sociale marcio. E questa forza è odiata da molti. La rivoluzione che avverrà li combatterà e li avrà come nemici. Abbiamo detto, come L.R., ha detto P. Roupa, che la rivolta (Dicembre 2008) non è abbastanza. Il ministero della cultura è stato un momento del futuro. Ha mostrato cosa sta per accadere. Attraverso l’omicidio di Grigoropoulos sono tornate alla mente i ricordi del 1944, quando i guerriglieri urbani combatterono negli stessi vicoli. Poi ci fù il tentativo di riprendere l’autorità. Questa mancanza di autorità deve essere ripresa dalla gente. Per l’uguaglianza sociale e la libertà.

La testimone Paraskevopoulou ha detto che è stata convocata perché i dati della sua carta di identità sono stati usati per affittare un “covo”, quando lei non ha mai perso un documento di identità. Lei non ha relazioni con gli accusati e non sa altro. Stessa storia per il testimone Grivokostopoulos. Egli perse il suo documento e lo denunciò. Sottolineiamo che il giudice è stato molto attento, correggendo entrambi quando hanno usato il termine “covo”, dicendo loro: “Intendete una casa, non è stato provato che fosse un covo”.

Voulgarakis è apparso, alla fine, per testimoniare. Ha detto che quel giorno, grazie alla buona sorte, dimenticò la valigetta e tornò per prenderla. Sentì un suono forte e insolito e le sue guardie del corpo lo fecero rientrare in casa. Se non l’avesse scordata, ha detto, sarebbe potuto rimanere colpito, visto che era l’obiettivo. Ha letto il comunicato dell’organizzazione. Come ministro dell’ordine pubblico non ha interferito nelle questioni prettamente di servizio. Secondo lui, ciò che è certo, è che fino ad allora L.R voleva solo diffondere le proprie idee, mentre dopo l’attacco contro il ministero ha capito che essi volevano anche il sangue. Ma, operativamente lui non è nella posizione per sapere altri dettagli, visto che era ministro della cultura. Ha chiesto un aggiornamento, mai dato dal ministero, ma ricevuto dal comunicato!

Alla domanda di S. Fitrakis su ciò che significasse per lui una responsabilità politica, Voulgarakis ha risposto che essa significa rivendicare responsabilità politiche che se affiancate ad atti criminali dovrebbero avere responsabilità penali. E lo stesso si applica al primo ministro? Ha insistito l’avvocato, ricevendo una risposta delirante. Nella giustizia penale secondo la sua opinione è abbastanza la responsabilità politica per la condanna penale di una persona? Non si dovrebbe dimostrare la partecipazione di questa persona ad azioni specifiche prima di dare cinque o sei ergastoli? Ha chiesto S. Fitrakis. Forse, ha continuato, quando si tratta di cittadini in rivolta le cose vanno diversamente? Quindi, Voulgarakis ha “volato basso”: Sono venuto qui per descrivere gli incidenti che ho vissuto. Ovviamente, se mi chiedete la mia opinione, io non sono d’accordo con il loro punto di vista.

Alla domanda sul perché fosse stato scelto come obiettivo, Voulgarakis ha risposto con generalizzazioni politiche. Messo alle strette, si è rifugiato nel nonsenso: “Allora, questi processi sono chiaramente penali. Non politici!”. Quando D. Vagianou ha fatto riferimento agli scandali che vedono coinvolto Voulgarakis, il giudice ha cercato di proteggerlo, chiedendo: “Lei, miss Vagianou, esattamente che cause sta cercando di servire? Lei ha detto di avere ogni diritto di provare orrore per gli scandali e per la corruzione, le registrazioni telefoniche e le torture sui migranti, nelle quali il nome di Voulgarakis è saltato fuori. Il suo comportamento mi provoca. Io non servo alcuna causa. Ho semplicemente chiesto e mi aspetto una risposta dal testimone. E lei ha avuto una risposta insensata, come quelle che Voulgarakis ha sempre dato, quando era una star politica in tv: “Ascolti. Una volta due amici camminavano da un lato della strada, e altri due dall’altro. Ad un certo punto uno disse all’altro : quello è un fascista. E lo uccisero. Chi era alla fine il fascista? Quello ucciso o quello che ha ucciso?”. La seria risposta di Voulgarakis è stata un aneddoto commentato dall’avvocato: “Pensa di non rappresentare l’autorità?” Voulgarakis non ha risposto.

Dalle successive domande del giudice è emerso che Voulgarakis ha anche mentito sui veri incidenti. Visto che le sue guardie del corpo hanno detto che lui non è entrato e uscito, ma che lo hanno aspettato mentre usciva da casa. “La loro testimonianza è stata imprecisa”, ha detto. E per evitare il punto, ha detto che non sapeva che l’esplosione era stata cancellata dall’organizzazione per non ferire nessuno. Dopo, rispondendo alla domanda di M. Daliani, ha dovuto di nuovo sciogliere la lingua. Dove si attribuiscono i motivi dell’attacco? Questo è citato nel comunicato, ha detto Voulgarakis. A questo punto il comunicato è vero? E non riguardo alla cancellazione dell’attacco? Ha continuato l’avvocato. Voulgarakis è rimasto di nuovo zitto.

Cosi, con il suo risaputo essere macho rugoso, Voulgarakis è andato via, quindi sono seguiti i commenti politici.

P. Roupa: Questo politico è un criminale e un truffatore. Un volto repellente dell’autorità. Va in giro in incognito. I poliziotti proteggono e servono questa gente. Ha partecipato negli scandali per i quali c’è stato l’attacco. Ha danneggiato il benessere della gente. Con sua moglie è stato coinvolto nello scandalo di Vatopedi. Ha una fortuna mitica e rubata. Se ci fosse una corte popolare oggi, lo farebbe a pezzi. Se questa persona andasse dinnanzi ai greci senza la presenza della polizia, lo distruggerebbero. I greci lo odiano. Lui e quelli come lui.

L’attacco a suo carico è avvenuto per via di due scandali: le registrazioni telefoniche (che sono una sorveglianza di massa dei cittadini greci) e il rapimento dei pakistani. La scelta di Voulgarakis è stata presa da L.R soprattutto perché lui è un criminale e poi perché ha organizzato il rapimento dei pakistani e ha partecipato agli scandali menzionati. Con l’uso della carica, lui e sua moglie, hanno svenduto i beni pubblici. I beni della gente. Hanno creato un’intera rete di compagnie offshore. Hanno fatto molto denaro e comprato numerose case. Nessuno si chiede da dove venga questa fortuna. Lui è diventato ricco sulle spalle dei greci. Riguardo allo specifico attacco sta mentendo. Iniziò cosi ma venne cancellato. Ci fu un altro tentativo prima di questo che non venne realizzato a causa di una moto che passava. La volta successiva, quella della quale stiamo parlando, arrivò il poliziotto che aveva controllato la zona, cosa insolita. L’attacco venne cancellato. La persona specifica, comunque, non la farà franca, né da parte delle organizzazioni “terroriste” né dalla gente.

N. Maziotis : Con questo attacco la vera giustizia è stata fatta, Voulgarakis è un criminale. Il 24/10 ho detto che altri dovrebbero essere al posto degli accusati. I membri dei due governi passati, PASOK e ND, Voulgarakis, se fosse processato dalla gente – visto che la vostra corte non è popolare e voi lo supportate – sarebbe severamente punito. Ciò che la gente prova riguardo a lui è stato realizzato. Gli attachi contro di lui sono innumerevoli. Al contrario, se vogliamo fare il confronto, noi non nascondiamo, siamo aperti, e chiaramente diciamo cosa siamo. La gente sputa su di lui e non su di noi. Abbiamo l’accettazione popolare. I motivi delle azioni dei politici di professione sono vili ed egoistici. Sono diventati politici al fine di diventare ricchi. Noi serviamo l’interesse della gente. Se la politica è un servizio al servizio della gente, la facciamo noi e non Voulgarakis e il resto dei politici di professione. Sono truffatori e speculatori. Sfruttano i bisogni della gente. Cercano voti. La democrazia rappresentativa è un sistema marcio. Essa opera la cessione dei diritti popolari e non l’applicazione delle politiche a favore della gente. Voulgarakis è corrotto. Ha confessato le relazioni dei politici con l’elite economica, le relazioni di collaborazione con imprenditori ed aziende, con grosse tangenti e denaro. Questo fenomeno non è anormale in democrazia cosi come ci dicono. E’ la regola. Guardiamo alle sue dichiarazioni dei redditi. Questi ragazzi sono molto poveri! (ha letto le dichiarazioni di reddito dal giornale Kathimerini).

Chi è il vero criminale?

Durante i 5 anni di servizio del ministro in questione (2004-2009), sono stati registrati 50 scandali. Non è un’anormalità. E’ la prassi dell’operato del capitalismo e del sistema. Lui è stato coinvolto in affari sporchi. E’ un uomo politico ed etico? Questo è audace. Noi difendiamo politicamente le azioni di LR. Voulgarakis è un truffatore politico (ha letto l’intera lista di scandali che lo hanno coinvolto, analizzandoli).

Voulgarakis ha mentito anche sul caso che esaminiamo ora. E’ un bugiardo e un ladro professionista. Ecco i crimini principali di Voulgarakis per i quali lo riteniamo colpevole e che spiegano l’attacco a suo danno: 1. Crimini contro la libertà della gente. 2. Rapimento e tortura dei pakistani. 3. Omicidio di Tsalikidis. 4. Furto ai danni della gente. Se l’attacco avesse avuto successo, ci sarebbe stata vera giustizia.

Il testimone Pehlivanis, un poliziotto, era a guardia di Voulgarakis. Ha detto di aver visto una donna in bici e due uomini, che ha ritenuto sospetti e l’ha comunicato, ma non era davanti alla zona dell’incidente. Non ha riconosciuto alcuno degli accusati. Addestrato da Voulgarakis, ha detto che lui è uscito e rientrato. Quando gli è stato detto che i suoi colleghi avevano detto altro, lui ha risposto che non sa le loro testimonianze! Alla domanda se la ritirata dei membri di LR fosse accidentale o consapevole, ha risposto che non può rispondere.

Gli altri quattro testimoni (un disoccupato, un impiegato alberghiero del Saint George, un agente in pensione e sua moglie, che hanno fatto varie descrizioni di persone, non sono stati capaci di testimoniare nulla di concreto e, naturalmente, non hanno riconosciuto nessuno).

Il testimone Polidoratos, poliziotto dell’autorità per l’immigrazione ha testimoniato riguardo all’incidente presso l’Eurobank ad Argiroupoli. Era di pattuglia e vide due moto parcheggiate fuori la banca, la vedetta chiamò gli altri tre e andarono sulle moto, i poliziotti si avvicinarono, e l’ultimo sulla seconda moto tirò fuori una pistola e andarono via. Non ha riconosciuto nessuno perché quelli indossavano dei caschi.

Il processo riprenderà il 10 Febbraio alle 09.00.

Fonte: actforfree – Traduzione: ParoleArmate
http://actforfree.nostate.net/?p=7983

http://parolearmate.noblogs.org/

http://it.contrainfo.espiv.net/2012/02/25/aggiornamento-sul-processo-a-lotta-rivoluzionaria-06-02-2012/#more-3648

Athens – REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE TRIAL SESSION 13, MONDAY 6/2/12

The witness Mattheou, resident of Dafni, was the owner of the car in which
Lambros Foundas, the day the cops executed him. The woman, of course,
could not testify anything. She was informed of the incident by the
television. She didn’t hear gunshots either. She couldn’t even remember if
her car, which she saw after a year and a half, had marks from two or
three bullets.
From the scene in Dafni, commented N.Maziotis, the prosecutor called only
the specific witness and not the two cops who are involved with the murder
of Lambros Foundas.. He didn’t call the murderers, obviously for
protection reasons. This attitude does not surprise us, he continued. The
role of the courts is to protect the lackeys of the system. The value of
life and justice is counted with the class position. You only protect
those like you. Lambros Foundas will remain in history as a fighter. He
lost his life fighting for the change of society, so the crisis becomes
the cause for the social revolution. It is our debt to defend Lambros
Foundas. He is not dead.
He is present and immortal.

This day is especially important to us as well the organization, continued
P.Roupa. We will speak about our comrade, because for us he is still
alive. Lambros Foundas “fell” during a specific choice of the
organization. He is a symbol of resistance and the upcoming social
revolution.

The witness Vagou, owner of an apartment in Ano Patissia, mentioned
someone called Mantalozis who rented the apartment, with his id card. When
at some point some council tax bills were unpaid, she looked in the
phonebook, found a Mandalozis, he told her he is not related, she realized
something is wrong, until he told her he went to the police. She was only
able to enter the apartment 6 months after the police raiding and found it
all blackened from the attempt to find fingerprints. They told her they
found nothing. The witness insisted that she does not recognize any of the
accused.

The witness Fili rented out a one bedroom flat in Kipseli to a gentleman,
a very polite guy. When she managed to re-enter her house she found it in
a mess from the police operation. “You’re lucky we didn’t manage to take
the walls too…”, she was told by the cops.

Witness Stamos served in the riot unit at the ministry of Culture, which
was shot at by the R.S. the only thing he remembers is that it was two
people wearing helmets or hoods. He couldn’t give any specific
characteristics.
Concerning the attack on the ministry of Culture we must say a few things,
stated P.Roupa. This choice was very specific. The ‘khakis’ had to be hit.

They are the most violent of the security forces and are responsible for
the vicious beatings of many people. These forces train militantly, she
said, adding that she as well has suffered the violence. And of course,
their political superiors knew this. She mentioned cases of torturing,
beatings of prisoners, even underage; to conclude that this is a socially
degraded force that guards a rotten social system. And this force is hated
by many. The revolution which will take place will go over them and will
have them against it. We had said as R.S., continued P.Roupa, that the
revolt (December 2008) is not enough. The ministry of Culture was a moment
from the future. It brought what was going to happen. Through the murder
of Grigoropoulos memories of 1944 came to mind, when the urban guerrillas
then fought in the same alleys. Then there was an attempt to take over the
authority. This gap of authority must be taken over by the people. For
social equality and freedom.

Witness Paraskevopoulou testified that she was called to testify because
her i.d. card information was used to rent a “safe-house”, when she has
never lost an i.d. card. She has no relation with the accused and knows
nothing else. Same story with witness Grivokostopoulos. He had lost his
i.d. and had declared it. We note that the judge was very carefull,
correcting both witnesses when they used the term “safe-house”, telling
them: “You mean a house, it has not been proven it’s a safe-house”.

Voulgarakis did appear, in the end, to testify. He testified that the
specific day, owing to his good luck, forgot his briefcase and went back
to get it. He heard a loud and unusual sound and his bodyguards put him
back into his house. if he had not forgotten the briefcase, he said, he
would have been hit, because he was the target. He read the organizations
communique in the press. As minister of Public Order he did not interfere
in strictly service matters. According to his opinion, what is sure is
that until then R.S. wanted to publicize its opinions, while after the
attempt against him the ministry realized that they wanted blood also.
But, operationally he is in no position to know more details, because he
was minister of Culture. He asked for a briefing, which he never got from
the ministry, but got it from the communique!

To the question of S.Fitrakis what it means for him the claim of political
responsibility, Voulgarakis answered that claim of political
responsibility means claiming political responsibilities which if
identified with criminal acts should be characterized penal
responsibility. And does the same apply to the Prime-Minister of the
state? Insisted the advocate, and received a delirious answer. In the
penal justice according to your opinion is enough for you the political
responsibility for the penal conviction of a person? Shouldn’t we prove
the participation of this person in specific actions before we give him
five or six time’s life? Asked S.Fitrakis. Maybe, he continued, when it’s
about revolted citizens things are different? So, Voulgarakis “piped
down”: I came here to describe the incidents as I experienced them.
Obviously, if you ask for my opinion, I disagree with their point of view.

To the questions of why he was chosen as a target, Voulgarakis answered
with political generalizations. When cornered, he found refuge in the
nonsense: “Look, these trials are clearly penal. Not political”! when
D.Vagianou referred to the scandals in which Voulgarakis himself in
implicated, the judge tried to protect him, asking: You, mrs Vagianou,
what exact claim are you trying to promote? The advocate didn’t cave. I
have every right, she said, to feel horror about the scandals and bribing,
the phone tapings and the torturing on immigrants, in which the name of
Voulgarakis has been implicated. His attitude provokes me. I do not serve
any claim. I simply ask wand expect an answer from the witness. And she
got a nonsense-answer, like the ones Voulgarakis always said, when he was
a political tv-star: “Listen. Once two friends were walking on one side of
the road, and two others on the other side. At some point one friend said
to another: ‘Him there, he is a fascist’. And he killed him. So is the
fascist in the end? The one who got killed or the one who killed?”. The
serious answer of Voulgarakis was an anecdote commented the advocate and
continued: Do you think you do not symbolize authority? Voulgarakis didn’t
say a word.
From the next questions of the judge it was revealed that Voulgarakis also
lied about the real incidents. Because his bodyguards said that there was
no in and out, but they waited for him to come out of his house. “Their
testimony was not accurate”, he commented. And to avoid the touch spot, he
stated that he was not informed that the explosion was cancelled by the
organization to not injure anyone. Afterwards, answering questions by
M.Daliani, he had to swallow his tongue again. Where do attribute the
reasons for the attack? This is mentioned in the communique, answered
Voulgarakis. At this point the communique was true? While concerning the
cancellation of the attack not? Continued the advocate. Voulgarakis again
swallowed his tongue.
Like this, with his old known machoness wrinkled, Voulgarakis left, so the
political comments can follow.

P.Roupa: This specific politician is a criminal and a crook. A repulsive
face of authority. He walks around in disguise. Cops protect and guard
such people. He participated in scandals which were the reason for the
attack. He seized the wealth of the people. He was involved with his wife
in the scandal of Vatopedi. He has a mythical and stolen fortune. If there
was a popular court today, they would cut him to pieces. If this person
appeared in front of the greek people without police presence, they would
crush him. The greek people hate him. Him and all those like him.

The attack against him took place because of two scandals: the phone
tapings (which was a mass surveillance of the greek citizens) and the
kidnapping of the Pakistanis. The choice of Voulgarakis was taken by the
R.S. first of all because he is a criminal and secondly because he
organized the kidnapping of the Pakistanis and participated in the
scandals mentioned. With the use of the chrysobulls he and his wife sold
out public property. Property of the people. They made off shore
companies. They created a whole network. They made loads of money and
acquired numerous houses. No one asks where all these fortunes came from.
He became filthy rich on the backs of the greek people. About the specific
attack he is lying. It started as such but it was cancelled. There was
another attempt before this one which also wasn’t carried out because of a
passing motorbike. The next time which we are talking about, the cop who
checked the area came, something unusual. The attack was cancelled. The
specific person, however, will not get away, not from the “terrorist”
organizations but from the people themselves.

N.Maziotis: With this attack real justice was served. Voulgarakis is a
criminal. On 24/10, I had said that others should be in the place of the
accused. Members of the two last governments, PASOK and N.D. Voulgarakis,
if tried by the people –because your court is not popular, you suck up to
him- would be severely punished. What the people feel about this person
has been realized. The attacks on him are uncountable. On the contrary, if
we want to make the comparison, we do not hide, we are openly, clearly
stating what we are. The people spit on him and not us. We have the
popular acceptance. The motives of the actions of the professional
politicians are vile and selfish. They became politicians in order to get
rich. We serve the interest of the people. If politics is a service in the
interest of the people, we do it and not Voulgarakis and the rest of the
professional polticians. They are crooks and speculators. They exploit the
needs of the people. They hunt votes. Representative democracy is a rotten
system. It suffers a cession of popular rights and not the exercise of
policies in favour of the people. Voulgarakis is corrupted. He has
confessed the relations of politicians with the economic elite, the
relations of intertwining with businessmen and companies, with fat bribes
and money. This phenomenon is not an abnormality in democracy as they tell
us. It is the rule. Let’s look at the asset sources of Voulgarakis. These
kids are very poor! (he read the asset source declaration from KATHIMERINI
newspaper).

Who is then the real criminal?

During the 5 year service of the minister in question (2004-2009), 50
scandals were recorded. It is not an abnormality. It is the rule of
operation of capitalism and the system. He got involved in dirty
businesses. He is the ethical and political man? This is audacious. We
defend the actions of R.S. politically. Voulgarakis is political crook (he
read the whole list of scandals he was involved in, analysing each one).

Voulgarakis lied also about the case we examine now. He is professional
liar and thief. What were the main crimes of Voulgarakis for which we
consider him guilty and for which the attack took place against him: 1.
Crimes against the freedoms of the people. 2. Kidnappings and torturing of
Pakistanis. 3. The murder of Tsalikidis. 4. Robbery at the expense of the
people. If the attack were successful, real justice would have been
served.

Witness Pehlivanis, a cop, was on the guard of Voulgarakis. He testified
that he saw a woman on a bike and two men, which he considered suspicious
and mentioned it, but was not in front of the incident. He did not
recognize anyone of the accused. Trained by Vougarakis, he said that he
came out and came back. When it was pointed out to him that his colleagues
testify otherwise, he answered he does not know their testimonies! To the
question if the retreat of the members of the R.S. was coincidental or
conscious, he replied that he cannot answered.

The other four witnesses (an unemployed, a hotel employee of Saint George,
a retired officer and his wife, who had made various descriptions of
people, were in no position to testify anything substancial and,
naturally, they did not recognize anyone).

Witness Polidoratos, a cop from the Immigration Authorities testified
about the incident at EUROBANK in Argiroupoli. He was on patrol, and saw
two motorbikes parking outside the bank, they went close, the lookout
called the other three and got on the motorbikes, the cops came closer,
the last one the second motorbike made a move and pulled out a gun and
they took off. He does not recognize anyone, because they were wearing
helmets.

The trial will continue on Friday the 10th of February at 9am.

translate by boubourAs

http://actforfree.nostate.net/?p=7983#more-7983

Atenas: El juicio del Caso Lucha Revolucionaria – En conmemoración a Lambros Foundas (Grecia)

Declaración de los miembros de Lucha Revolucionaria el 6 de febrero de 2012, con respecto al enfrentamiento armado de Dafni, en el cual Lambros Foundas fue asesinado en combate por la policía.

La operación represiva contra Lucha Revolucionaria se inició con una riña armada en Dafni el 10 de marzo de 2010, cuando nuestro compañero Lambros Foundas fue muerto en una batalla con los policías Andreas Haskis y Theodoros Koumarapis.

A pesar de que este incidente se convirtió en el punto de partida de las investigaciones que dieron lugar a nuestros arrestos, el fiscal de apelación Makropoulos no convocó a los dos policías asesinos de Lambros Foundas a testificar en este juicio, sólo se le llamó al estrado a la dueña del coche que los compañeros trataron de expropiar, con el fin de usarlo en una acción de la organización.

Es obvio que los dos policías que no fueron convocados por las autoridades judiciales no es por otra razón que para ser protegidos, por lo tanto, como hemos dicho antes, esto demuestra la fusión de las autoridades judiciales y policiales. Es obvio que el Fiscal de Apelación intentó proteger a los asesinos de Lambros Foundas.

Esto no nos sorprende. Asimismo a nosotros tampoco nos sorprendió el hecho de que las circunstancias del asesinato de Lambros Foundas no fueran investigadas y no serán investigadas por ningún juez. El papel de los jueces, así como el de los tribunales, por supuesto, es proteger los intereses clasistas de los jefes, los ricos y sus lacayos y esbirros, que no son otros más que los agentes de policía.

Y esto demuestra la hipocresía de la justicia estatal, porque cuando los jueces y otros funcionarios del sistema hablan sobre el valor de la vida humana, se refieren exclusivamente a las vidas de sus compañeros de clase, a las que ellos mismos están sirviendo, es decir, las mismas personas que componen el poder económico y político, y aquellos que los están protegiendo, a saber, los miembros de la policía.

Para los jueces y el tribunal, es valiosa la vida de los matones y pretorianos del sistema, tales como [los policías] Mantzounis, Margellos, Stamos, todos aquellos que están entrenados y pagados para el asalto, la tortura y la muerte. Y aún más valioso para este tribunal es la vida de las personas como el ex ministro de Orden Público Voulgarakis, quien es odiado por el pueblo. De acuerdo con la “justicia” clasista, el valor de la vida humana se mide en términos de la posición de clase de cada uno de nosotros; medida por si sirve al Poder y al régimen criminal llamado capitalismo y economía de mercado.

Lambros Foundas será recordado como un luchador por la libertad que dio su vida preparándose para otro golpe de Lucha Revolucionaria contra el sistema.

Él dio su vida tanto que la ocupación del gobierno griego, el FMI, el BCE y la UE no podría dejarse pasar; tanto que la actual junta del Estado y el Capital no podría dejarse pasar; tanto que el nuevo totalitarismo que la élite económica y política quiere imponer en todo el mundo, con motivo de la crisis financiera mundial, no podría dejarse pasar. Lambros Foundas dio su vida luchando para hacer que la crisis sea una oportunidad para la revolución social.

Por el contrario, los asesinos de Lambros Foundas, Andreas Haskis y Theodoros Koumarapis, quedarán registrados en la historia como mercenarios y miembros de un mecanismo de asesinos. Ellos quedarán registrados en la historia como títeres de un régimen injusto y criminal, títeres y lacayos de los que saquean, oprimen y explotan a la gente.

Al igual que este tribunal se recordará en la historia como un tribunal especial que oye a revolucionarios y combatientes que luchan por la destrucción del capitalismo y el Estado, por otro lado también se lo recordará como un tribunal que representa a los traidores del pueblo, los colaboracionistas contemporáneos que están al servicio de la élite económica supranacional.

Es nuestro deber como miembros de Lucha Revolucionaria vindicar a Lambros Foundas en este tribunal del enemigo de clase. Además de eso, la reivindicación de la responsabilidad política por nuestra participación en Lucha Revolucionaria era una cuestión natural, con el fin no sólo de defender a nuestra organización, sino también de defender a nuestro compañero.

Para nosotros, sus compañeros de Lucha Revolucionaria, Lambros Foundas no ha fallecido. Está en nuestra sangre y en el aire que respiramos como combatientes. Él está dentro de nuestras metas y objetivos. Él se identifica con nuestra organización y nuestra lucha. Cada día, cada momento, él está presente. Él es inmortal.

Miembros de Lucha Revolucionaria
Pola Roupa, Kostas Gournas, Nikos Maziotis

Extraído de 325, traducido por VLA

http://vivalaanarquia.espivblogs.net/?p=11331#more-11331

Lucha Revolucionaria

Éste folleto contiene una serie de textos y comunicados de la organización de lucha armada “Epanastatikos Agonas” (Lucha Revolucionaria), que ha actuado principalmente en Atenas desde el 2003 hasta principios del 2010. Lxs tres militantes detenidos en abril del 2010 que asumieron su pertenencia a la organización (a los que habría que añadir el nombre del activista Lambros Fountas, asesinado por la policía durante un tiroteo el mes anterior y que ha inspirado la portada del cuadernillo), así como el resto de lxs imputadxs por éste proceso (son ocho en total), son todxs viejxs militantes anarquistas participantes desde los años 90′ en las luchas sociales y el movimiento anarquista en Grecia.
Nuestra intención, con esta publicación, es amplificar el llamamiento internacional que lxs compas realizaron desde la cárcel a finales del 2010, de cara al juicio a lxs 8 que comenzó el 5 de octubre de 2011, y qué mejor manera que difundiendo sus textos y comunicados emitidos desde su arresto, acompañados de un relato sobre cómo fueron sus detenciones y las posteriores condiciones de encarcelamiento, y finalizando con una cronología de sus acciones acompañada de algunos recortes de prensa y extractos de sus comunicados.
La originalidad para nosotros de esta guerrilla urbana en la metrópoli del siglo XXI es notable, en un contexto en el que, pese a la crisis y la inestabilidad, la pacificación social está más arraigada que nunca en las cabezas de los potenciales rebeldes. Que sirva como estímulo de rebelión el saber que, no tan lejos de aquí y no tan diferentes a nosotrxs, existen todavía individuos capaces de rebelarse hasta las últimas consecuencias contra un sistema criminal, terrorista e injusto.
Nos urge aclarar que las direcciones que aparecen al final del folleto están anuladas: el 11 de octubre de éste año que ya se nos va lxs compas presxs de Lucha Revolucionaria -Pola Roupa, Nikos Maziotis y Kostas Gournas- fueron liberadxs tras pasar el máximo de 1 año y medio en prisión preventiva. Lamentablemente, Kostas Katsenas (acusado de ser miembro del grupo, pero que lo niega) sigue tras las rejas. Ni el juicio ni la lucha han acabado, todo sigue.

Lucha Revolucionaria: guerrilla urbana en la metrópolis del siglo XXI
Algunxs anarquistas españolxs
Entropía Ediciones
21,5 x 14 cms.
42 páginas
Trueque o $300.

Descargar la portada
http://entropiaediciones.noblogs.org/files/2011/12/lucha-portada.pdf


Descargar folleto
http://barcelona.indymedia.org/usermedia/application/1/lucharevolucionaria.pdf


http://entropiaediciones.noblogs.org/?p=356#more-356

ATHENS-REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE CASE UPDATES,9TH SESSION,19/12/2011,Session 11, Wednesday 25/1/12

9TH SESSION, 19/12/2011,

At the beginning of the session there were comments on the two-day
testimony of Papathanasakis from K.Katsenos defence. P.roumeliotis
referred in detail to all the incidents testified by Papathanasakis, from
which not even indications of K.Katsenos result. And how did
Papathanasakis try to cover the absence of the slightest indication? By
lying, that Katsenos denied to give fingerprints. When, however, the
questions followed, he was made to admit that Katsenos did give
fingerprints, but there was a problem with two of his fingers, for which
he was not responsible. The advocate revealed that the problem was a type
of dermatitis that Katsenos suffers from, for which his mother brought the
relative doctors document. Papathanasakis, noted the advocate, made a
stale claim to justify the attribution of charges to Katsenos. In some
regimes, continued P.Roumeliotis, an identity was enough to render you
guilty. In Nazi Germany, if you were Jewish. In racist South Africa, if
you were black. In McCarthy’s America, but also in post war Greece, if you
were a communist. Let’s not reach the equation of the identity of an
anti-authoritarian with indications of participation in organizations such
as Revolutionary Struggle. He ended his comments by reading excerpts from
an article from ‘Kathimerini’ newspaper titled “Overturn in the R.S.
trial” and an article of ‘Eleutherotypia’ newspaper, which also made the
approach to the testimony of Papathanasakis.

Ch.Ladis continued from where his colleague stopped, commenting on the
testimony of Papathanasakis from another point of view. After this
testimony, he said, I was afraid that Katsenos might tell us to withdraw
the objection of excluding Papathanasakis, with which we defended the
prestige of Justice and not the special interest of our client, for whom
Papathanasakis was exonerative. He characterized Papathanasakis as a legal
time bomb, which blew up in the court and the shards wounded much and
many.
He directly admitted that he was an interrogating employee and this
wounded the prestige of the court. For two days he constantly committed
the offence of perjury exposing thus the court which tolerated him. He
also exposed his service by saying that he never received any documents
from his predecessors for RS. The testimony of Papathanasakis should be
thrown in the bin or he should be persecuted for perjury, as is specified
for anyone who obviously denies testifying about their informers. Never,
however, was Papathanasakis pressured to mention the obvious. We as the
defence of Katsenos, ended Ch.Ladis, are helped by Papathanasakis, because
it acquitted our client, but for reasons of procedural correctness there
should be no mention to the name Papathanasakis. Let him be considered a
stain on the whole procedure.
F.Vergados commented that Papathanasakis testimony should not be taken
into consideration, because he claimed information without revealing the
sources, while on the other hand we heard amazing things as his personal
estimations. For example that the accused observed conspiratorial rules.
And what were they? That they acted naturally!!

Vaggelis Stathopoulos read his own written evaluation, in the form of a
statement. It is not the first time that fighters are dragged to court. He
said. Authority always sought the extermination of its political enemies.
During the junta, a lie from a cop was enough to get you exiled. In
democracy one or more ‘I don’t remember’ are enough to send you to jail.
Papathanasakis, knew me well from the time he was head of Nikea police
station, just as he knew my whole family. After the death of a Pakistani
immigrant, I and a friend were threatened to stop mobilizing for the case,
because he would ‘wrap us in a piece of paper’. Intentionally he tried to
present my house as a weird house, while it was open to a lot of people.
In the same way my address book transformed into a note well hidden and my
car goes to the mountain, while I am detained. My persecution is strictly
political, because of my participation in the anarchist movement and the
social struggles. Because I deny to condemn any form of struggle and
because
I have friendships which I won’t denounce.

Pola Roupa also made a comment, simultaneously opening another major
matter. I did not expect anything different from Papathanasakis testimony,
she said. I did not expect him to say anything serious, but it was proven
that the problem is much deeper. While he consciously lied big, nothing
happened from the judges. He said, that allegedly his service does not
follow anarchists, while there is officially a special department just for
that job. When people know that they are being followed, it makes sense
that they will take some protection measures, and this is suspicious to
Papathansakis. Everyone in the anarchist-anti authoritarian movement is a
suspect to him. From the fingerprints found in the house of our comrades
Lambros Foundas began an industry of investigations, interrogations,
calls. Because they had nothing on the organization, (if we hadn’t taken
the political responsibility there would have been absolutely nothing),
they opened a circle of investigation, calling for interrogation about 50
comrades from the anarchist- anti authoritarian movement, but again found
nothing. They attempted the political isolation of us three, they
attempted to bend the will for solidarity.

We are talking about a case which is up in the air. All they did was try
to hurt the anarchist movement. They ended up for reasons of revenge to
bring as an accused also Mari Beraha, to hurt Kostas Gournas.

You do not know and you will never know if in RS there were 10, 20, 50,
how many people were. You do not know and you will never know anything
about the actions of the organization. You will only guess and estimate
how many participated in some actions, without knowing who. For RS you are
at zero. What did Papathanasakis say about me? If I hadn’t taken the
political responsibility, what would he say about me? I chose for
political reasons to take the political responsibility, because I
considered this my debt towards the organization and to our dead comrade.

In addition, was proven the absolute cooperation of police and juridical
authorities. To Papathanasakis biggest lies and his continuous “I don’t
remember” you said nothing. But he, who allegedly couldn’t remember the
name of any of his inferiors’ names, remembered to say, when asked about
Dervenion street, that a comrade called Aggelatakis lives there, who has
nothing to do with the case. Why does he remember that? Because they are
following him. It makes sense that Papathanasakis would lie, but it does
not make sense that you cover him like this. This proves that you function
with a political order and there is possibility that people are convicted
whom have nothing to do with this and we will find ourselves with hundreds
of years of prison on our backs.

Papathanasakis also said that we were not followed. Not only were we
followed constantly, but they almost killed us. P.Roupa read out
statements of N.Maziotis, which had been published years ago in the press,
like when they knocked him off his motorbike. I tell you again, she
continued, this was our life from since 2001 when comrade Maziotis was
released. To prove, however, the charge of leadership, they have to admit
that they were talking crap about the surveillance. There is an interview
of Markogiannakis on Real FM where he says that Maziotis never ceased to
be followed, that there is a massive file with thousands of pages and if
the case goes to the appeals interrogator, he will tell him. “Did he go to
the interrogator mrs Roupa?”, intervened the prosecutor, without wondering
why the interrogator did not call him, since Markogiannakis constantly
said these things back then. “We call him here, to come to the court”,
answered immediately P.Roupa, putting in the demand to play the
Markogiannakis radio interview in the court as well as TV interview on
‘Skai’ channel, so no one can dispute this fact. “No one disputes it”,
commented the judge, in an attempt to avoid the demand.
The video should be shown, insisted Roupa, to clarify here that either for
eight years they did nothing or we tore apart their surveillance measures.
During the ruling of PASOK and ND they followed us constantly. We took the
political responsibility and again they have nothing, they don’t even know
how many were in the organization.

An extensive dialogue began between P.Roupa and the advocates D.Vagianou
and S.Fitrakis on one side, and the judge and public prosecutor on the
other.

The arguments of Roupa-Vagianou-Fitrakis were clear and specific.
Markogiannakis should be examined at this point of the procedure and
later, when all irrelevant witnesses who have nothing to say will have
passed. Papathanasakis, knowing that anarchists do not apply a
hierarchical model but horizontal procedures, spoke of a “central role”.
To investigate, therefore, this “central role”, we must look at the past.
We must look at this massive file. Markogiannakis says that he does not
think that Maziotis has a central role. And not try to attribute the
leadership to us and from there on the ethical perpetration for all
actions, stressed P.Roupa.
The judge firstly was a bit uncomfortable, without being able to find a
counter-argument. He got the point to say, that he himself does not
dispute what is said by Markogiannakis, because he has heard him say these
things in private. He proposed therefore that they are taken for granted,
but to not play his interviews! The prosecutor proposed a solution:
tape-record Markogiannakis interviews, but do not project the videos, to
not turn the court room into a theatre. P.Roupa quickly replied, that
during the trial of the Conspiracy Cells of Fire, despite the opposition
of the advocates, they played videos and showed photos of the personal
moments of the accused, who had nothing to do with the case.

The only reason to deny the demand, noted N.Maziotis, is so that the
seediness of the state mechanism is not revealed. The DAEEB oppressed and
the through snitching journalists who wrote different things and mentioned
also my name. I, during Voulgarakis-Markogiannakis was pointed at as a
member of R.S. We are honoured and proud of the 16 actions of the
organization, but you must prove if we were at them. Practically, if we
accept what Markogiannakis says, ended P.Roupa, the charge will be only
participation. They searched, searched, that’s why the 18 month period
expired, but found nothing.

After the decision about Markogiannakis, the defence of Katsenos deposited
an important demand. They asked that the court decides the lifting of the
detainment of Katsenos and replace it with restricting terms. The demand
has two sides. A formal side, which concerns the line of the law, and a
substantial side, which concerns the ratio of the law. The ratio of the
law says that the specific synthesis can better than anyone else to judge
the demand for the lifting of the detainment of Katsenos, because they
know the trial brief, has seen Katsenos for two and a half months now and
therefore know him personally, while now they also have the testimony of
Papathanasakis which has wiped out every idea of indication at the expense
of Katsenos. An Appeals judge council is an equal body, which however does
not have the above advantages. Besides this, the economy of the trial is
made easier, because the massive trial brief will not have to leave to go
to the council and the trial will not have to be interrupted until the
brief comes back. Because –as noted by P.Roumeliotis and Ch.Ladis- they
cannot even imagine that the whole brief will not go to the council, but
only the order and the police files.

The prosecutor, flipping through the Penal Code, while the advocates
presented their arguments, immediately proposed the demand is rejected,
claiming the line of the law. The Code, he said, does not speak of cases
of interrupting the trial. For these cases the council is always in
charge, this is why the court must claim it has no jurisdiction and should
get into the heart of substance of the demand.
Secondly the advocates asked of the court to see the ratio, the justifying
base of the law. The prosecutor presented a simple repeat of the
procedural regulation, ignoring the justifying base. And finally, the
court must have the courage to admit and not say: “let this glass pass
from me”.(biblical term)

This specific court, however, afraid of responsibility,
super-conservative, knowing that it gives exams to the powerful ones,
acted accordingly to the… evangelical quote. It threw the ball to the
council, declaring itself unqualified. The judge wished good luck to the
council, admitting thus indirectly, that there is absolutely nothing to
justify the imprisonment of K.Katsenos. Practically, however, he will
remain in prison for an unknown time still, while the “intentions” of the
council are uncertain.
After that we enjoyed the…. surveyor of the anti-terrorist, a.k.a.
sergeant Kostandinos Geldis. He says, he took a handwritten diagram found
at the house of Maziotis-Roupa in Kalivia with the order to find what
exactly it shows. So, the genius found that it shows a square block behind
the building of GADA (central Athens police headquarters), facing Panormou
street, and even has some marks on it which shows there was a plan to
carry out an action against pedestrians and various cops which park at a
spot and carry out searches. And how did this genius cop find this out?
Because he happens to pass by there every day and he knows the spot. After
spotting it, he took his measuring tape, measured and realized an action
was being prepared, based on two homocentric circles and a rectangle
triangle which was in the diagram! He is good in math, but doesn’t know
that a rectangle triangle does not have a… diagonal, but a hypotenuse!

Of course, he did all this on his own and then went and gave a testimony
to his colleagues. He did not put together a report neither did he take
another colleague with him, just to make this a bit formal.
And why through many books, with hundreds of notes, found in the house of
Maziotis-Roupa (S.Fitrakis read out many titles of the confiscated books),
only this note was chosen, while the rest weren’t even searched? The cop
froze. And since on the same note there was a second drawing with streets
in Plaka area and many spots noted on them, why was nothing found in Plaka
that gives a suspicion of the planning off an action of the R.S.? The cop
again froze.

The procedure closed with ‘Papathanasakis no2’ or the ‘Papathanasakis’ of
Chemistry, Dimitris Katharios. He is in charge of the DNA checks and he
would accept objections to what he said. Someone with a degree in
chemistry and a MBA in food biology, with minimum to none experience, was
hired as a civilian employee of the police and acts worse than a cop.
These are some parts from his testimony which will continue in the next
session.

-While there is an international scientific dispute of the DNA
methodology, even by police reports, Katharios didn’t say a word about
this, but presented the method as undisputed, as the absolute method of
identification.

-The police laboratory has not been certified by the completely
disgraceful ESYD (National Accreditation System), which openly shares out
certifications even to private labs. Its little shop, with which the
police does its job, without referring the lab of the Forensic Service
neither the university labs. Why is a lab which has been in a “procedure
of certification”, monopolizes all the criminal investigations, and no
other state and university labs.

-Although the guy is just a simple employee (chemist) he appeared to
testify as if he was the head of the department. He ensured that the whole
procedure, from the collection of the samples up to the research, is
performed in the proper way and there is no way they can make a mistake!
But, how does he know this? When a sample is collected, he is not there.
He should have said that he is responsible for the laboratory research.
They bring him something and he examines it.

-It is characteristic how he froze when, while talking all this crap about
the professionalism with which they collect all the samples from the
evidence, D.Vagianou showed him photos, in which you could see a rocket
thrown on a mattress and a series of guns thrown onto some cardboard.
“These are photographs from the newspapers”, he mumbled. These, however,
are photos which the anti-terrorist force gave to the newspapers and
depict clearly that no care is taken in order to protect the evidence. For
example if the mattress was an old mattress from the Gournas family, why
shouldn’t there be i.e. dandruff from the hair of his wife? D.Vagianou
stated, and the chemist-cop swallowed his tongue.

This whole story with the DNA is because of Mari Beraha (for none of the
other accused). They allegedly found genetic material on the trigger of a
Zastava pistol, which was identified with genetic material found in the
house of Maries father, Manolis Berahas, and when compared with other
genetic material found in the same house they realised there was
hereditary compatibility. They didn’t say Mari Beraha but they… figured
it’s obvious…

The trial was scheduled to continue on 13/1/12 but was postponed till
25/1/12 because of a three day strike by the Athens Lawyers Assosiation.

REVOLUTIONARY TRIAL CASE UPDATE
Session 11, Wednesday 25/1/12
The session began with the completion of the examination of the police
“chemist” D.Katharios, from Ch.Kortesis advocate P.Gianakopoulou.
Afterwards, there were comments on Katharios marathon testimony.
N.Maziotis said that the list of witnesses was not formed accidentally. He
brought as an example the “surveyor” of the anti-terrorist force Geldis,
who fixed a story with a hunch, to justify the arrests, in the name of an
upcoming attack on the spot which Geldis “discovered”. There were many
hunches, but EL.AS (greek police) could not make solid assumptions,
because only the organization knew what actions it will carry out. There
were for example names of politicians. Why didn’t they assume that the
organization would attack them? N.Maziotis referred to how Papathanasakis
planned out the testimonies first, then passed them on to Geldis and
Katharios. The diagram of Panormou street, he pointed out, proves
absolutely nothing, unless we take Papathanasakis assumptions as the
truth.
Going onto Katharios and his testimony, he said that the court will
consider the fact that no one gave DNA as proof of guilt, this is why
there is no measure for comparison, neither has there been a result
concerning the participation of who in which action of the organization.
Why we didn’t give DNA? Continued N.Maziotis. Because we are political
opponents and we never give anything to the enemy with our own consent.
The matter is political. I personally have never given anything,
fingerprints or photographs. Whatever they have, they have taken it
violently. Despite all this, while Katharios speaks of X unknown
individuals, you will identify the DNA, because this is the political
decision.
Afterwards, he went on to Katharios lies. From his testimony, he said, it
was proven that the procedure of collecting DNA is completely
untrustworthy. He referred to the guns which were openly lying around on
the floor or the mattress. Katharios said that the first people who go in
are trained to take precautions. And it was proven that in the house on
Eginis street, they found only 12 DNA samples and 7 of them were of their
own people, cops. They were infected either during the collection or
during transportation. A percentage of 70% was infected and Katharios
lied at first, that there is no possibility of infection. Maziotis also
reminded some of the amazing contradictions Katharios fell upon, saying
one thing in one session and another thing in the other. In our case, he
concluded, this untrustworthy procedure cannot be applied, because we
have not given DNA. But you will use it. Your decision will be clearly
political.
Katharios got to the point of perjury, commented D.Vagianou, trying to
hide facts or present false facts as true. She referred analytically to
his evasions, refusals, and contradictions. The DNA method, she stressed,
carries great dangers and can set up nightmarish traps. She referred to
the possibility of transporting DNA, but also of producing DNA, the
dangers of infection, the possibility of secondary transportation, the
mixes, to conclude that for these dangers alone, DNA should be abandoned
as a means of proof. M.Beraha, concluded the advocate, was found accused
only with the DNA and was proven that she is accused without there even
being a comparison with a reference sample. She is accused, therefore,
with assumptions and scenarios. K.Gournas was arrested and tortured.
Afterwards, was approached with the intention to cooperate and give
evidence. All this he has stated in a publication in the press titled:
“This is how I was interrogated”.
What did Katharios tell us, commented M.Daliani: “I everything was done
correctly, then the DNA examination is trustworthy”. But, through his
testimony it was proven that nothing was done correctly, but on the
contrary there were infections, doubtful transportation conditions,
examination and storage etc. Such examinations should not be carried out
in the police laboratory, commented A.Paparousou, because this lab
supports the charge. It does not consist of independent scientists, but of
recruited technicians. In order to “document” all that she said, the
advocate presented a recording, of the ones which Katharios and the other
cops do not present to the court. It is one of those recordings where
subjectivism pervades. They only bring their own conclusions and not the
recordings, because that’s where subjectivism shows. These recruited
technicians only manage a couple of pieces of information and are ordered
to do this. Instead of throwing light onto reality, they put deeper in the
dark. They won’t even give you the facts of this method which they are
trying to to present to you as trustworthy.
We have drained the DNA matter, commented P.Roupa. What impressed me is
that Papathanasakis and Geldis and Katharios did not have the fundamental
ability to lift the weight they had taken on. She referred to the graphic
testimony of Geldis, and then got the alleged scientist Katharios, who
messed up. What they propagate as a super-weapon, DNA, is completely
flawed and is based on a science which is up in the air. A circle of
testimonies of police witnesses has closed, concluded P.Roupa, and now
begins the main trial which concerns the actions of the organization, to
which we will give special weight, revealing their political character.
The witnesses have been chosen in order to give substance to matters and
actions, which according to our persecutors feed the perception that it is
about a criminal organization. From now on we will position ourselves on
the political choices of struggle we will try to reveal the political
motives and the political objectives the organization had. The next
witnesses concern the attack on the ministry of Culture, which took place
after the murder of Grigoropoulos and the social explosion that followed.
The murder was the reason; the cause was the decadent life that a lot of
people lived. The judge tried to stop P.Roupa from referring to the
historical frame in which the specific incident took place, but she
resisted intensely and made the judge back down and let her complete what
she was saying which concerned the historical frame in which this action
of the R.S. took place, the criminal role of the police, the murders of
citizens, the role of the criminal mechanism of the MAT (greek riot cop
unit) etc.
Ch.Kortesis stated that his refusal to give DNA derives from his political
identity as an anarchist and his political values which come to a complete
opposition with any cooperation with the persecuting mechanisms. I will
not legalize or condone any attempt of creating a bank of biological data,
i.e. biological filing. Whatever penal cost my choice has, I would rather
preserve my political and personal dignity.
S.Nikitopoulos stated that in his case the refusal to give DNA is a
clearly political act and should not be considered proof of guilt. This
political act, in hostage conditions, acquires a character of an act of
resistance. It derives from our political opposition to authority and
state oppression, the controlling of our lives and any kind of filing. It
is a common secret that the Police since 1996 started collecting DNA
samples from opponents of authority. There are named statements of people
stating that cops watch their houses and go through the garbage. I will
not allow this absurdity they want to impose on our lives. He spoke of
shops from which the police goes by and collects glasses, a fact confirmed
by Ch.Kortesis, referring to such an incident that happened to him.
The discussion was closed by N.Maziotis, reminding what Papathanasakis
said for Katsenos: If he is innocent, why didn’t he give DNA?this is not
just the perception of the police, it is also your perception, he
commented. Remember when the prosecutor asked the advocate of Katsenos, if
he can give DNA now? This shows that you have turned our refusal to give
DNA into proof of guilt.
Then it was the turn of the two riot cops, who were shot at outside the
ministry of culture, Ad.Matzounis and A.Margelos (the first one got two
bullets and was injured, now is ok, but has retired). They saw nothing,
except for two people, without being able to recognize anyone. They
couldn’t even give a general description. The judge and public prosecutor
made a few formal questions, without trying to “colorize” anything.
The attack on the ministry of culture, just as the previous one in Goudi,
stated N.Maziotis, was a legitimate political answer to the murder of
Grigoropoulos from the police murderers Korkoneas and Saraliotis. He spoke
analytically about the role of the police, reminding Polydoras phrase
“praetors”. The police forces are servants of the rich, servants of the
state and capital. They are servants and bodyguards of the capitalists,
lackeys of authority, and dogs of authority. R.S. had warned a year and a
half earlier, when they sprayed Nea Ionias police station with bullets,
answering the phrase of Polydoras, that cops who are attacked have a
sensitive nervous system. R.S. warned that they will reply if there are
dead people. The Grigoropoulos murder confirmed this warning and the
answer was compulsory. Violence to the violence.
N.Maziotis also referred to the barbaric economic and social policy, with
the neo-liberal measures against the workers, which needs the state
oppression. In social war, he said, there will be deaths and injuries and
prisoners. Matzounis paid the price of his choice to become a cop, just
as we, when you convict us, will pay the price to be members of an armed
revolutionary organization. And Lambros Foundas paid for the same price
with his life. Everyone pays the price of the field they have chosen. Our
difference is that we are volunteers in the struggle for freedom, while
you are mercenaries of the capitalist system. He read also an excerpt
from the communique with which R.S. took the responsibility for the
attack against the riot cops (he developed the estimations of the
organization concerning the character of the time and the revolutionary
possibilities, analysing the tactics of the R.S., as its described in its
communiques), he spoke about the armed propaganda and the deposit which,
in his opinion, this action left. That is that decisive revolutionaries
can clash with the armed mechanisms of the state in a direct conflict and
demean them operationally, a fact he characterized important for the
expectant popular revolt.
He referred, finally, to the murdering orgy of the police, for which no
one is persecuted. Who are you, who will speak to us about human life? You
are hypocrites. You have two measures and two levels. You only care of
those similar to you, everyone else is category b or c. Even the cops,
your servants, you have them as disposable. When the police kills, there
is no matter, these executions are fair. When R.S. shoots Matzounis it is
illegal.
Maziotis intervention annoyed the prosecutor, who interrupted him to say
that Matzounis is a kid and he is not the system and Maziotis should be
ashamed of what he is saying. This is not manly, he said angrily, causing
the raging reaction of Maziotis and Roupa, who spoke again about the
crimes of the police and the covering which the juridical authority
diachronically offers to these crimes. Maziotis listed a whole catalogue
of crimes. P.Roupa also answered to the prosecutor, about manhood, and
spoke of the barbarity of the system today, which leads to destructions
and suicides. If the banks put the noose around peoples necks, the judges
are those who kick the stool, she said. Is this manly? She then referred
to the meaning of crime, speaking of the massive criminality of
capitalism, as it develops around the world.
The trial will continue on Monday, January 30, at 9am.

translate by Actforfreedomnow/boubourAs


http://actforfree.nostate.net/?p=7797#more-7797