Text written by the three imprisoned members of Revolutionary Struggle about the trial of the organization which will start on October 5, 2011 (Greece) CLIK ON Poster…


Revolutionary Struggle trial solidarity zine


‘Revolution is the only solution
for the complete exit from the crisis’

A collection of letters, texts and communiqués from the armed group Revolutionary Struggle and their accused. Released during their current trial in Athens and intended to be one more nail in the coffin of the legitimacy of the State and the capitalist system.


by Actforfreedomnow – BoubourAs

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Athens: “The social revolution is the only response to the crisis”

Banners from PA’s gathering on Saturday, January 21st, in Athens

“The social revolution is the only response to the crisis
Solidarity with those prosecuted for the Revolutionary Struggle case

“Solidarity with the members of Revolutionary Struggle
Solidarity with those prosecuted for the same case
Freedom to K.Katsenos who is prosecuted for the same case”

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Athens: New posters regarding the Revolutionary Struggle case

Against the wall of silence surrounding the trial and the political discourse of the accused in the Revolutionary Struggle case and against the criminalization of solidarity as expressed by the prosecutions for the occupation of flash radio station
PA’s gathering, Saturday, January 21st, 2012, at 13.00, in Korai Square (on the side of Stadiou Street), Athens
Solidarity with the arrestees of flash radio station cannot be other than to promote the cause of the occupation itself.
Call for the organization of solidarity actions for the Revolutionary Struggle case, on Tuesday, January 24th, 2012, at 19.00, in Athens Polytechnic School
Solidarity with the members of Revolutionary Struggle, and those who stand trial for the same case
Assembly for the Revolutionary Struggle case

Athens: Solidarity gathering for the Revolutionary Struggle case

'The insurgents are right'
with the members of REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE
and all those who are prosecuted for the same case
The call for the solidarity gathering
The case of social liberation within a revolutionary perspective is always current because the chains of the repressed of this decayed world will only break if we fight by all means.
All the subversive purposes ought to get organized in common without creating matters of division within the struggle for the social liberation. It is important to realize that the means used for the overthrow of the current system are choices that all converge in the same direction.
The armed struggle is a radical form of struggle and should be analyzed as such. It is another choice within the polymorphous action of the revolutionary and radical movement, since it propels the actual and direct confrontation against the state and its mechanisms of exploitation.
The comrades that are prosecuted for the case of the Revolutionary Struggle continue to give meaning to the struggle with their speech and criticism for the overthrow of the State and Capitalism inside and outside the cells of democracy and courts.
Assembly for the case of Revolutionary Struggle
sources 1, 2

Chania, Crete: Solidarity poster by saltadoroi


| 1 Comment

The 7th day of the trial of Revolutionary Struggle began with the interventions of advocates D.Vagianou, K.Dailianas, S.Fitrakis, and A.Paparousou concerning the freezing of accounts carried out by the independent Authority of Fighting the Legalization of Income from Criminal Activities and the Financing of Terrorism and Controlling of the Wealth situation Statements, without the defendants been convicted for terrorism offences. Which means that a trial begins without the evidence of innocence suggesting that offences have been committed. Since a specific Higher Authority has decided that the accused are guilty of terrorism offences, what is the reason to continue this trial, stressed S.Fitrakis. One demand of the advocates is that the judges give a guarantee that the accused are still on trial and their frozen wealth can be returned to them.

S.Nikitopoulos intervening stated that they classify him in the list of people who are suspects of state terrorism, while corrupt politicians and businessmen are absent. He claimed that as an anarchist he does not have illusions because he knows how far state oppression can go, but article 187A dismisses the evidence of innocence and blatantly standardize offences.
The judge announced that the advocates can take the document that confirms that the trial is in progress from the secretariat.
After that, P.Roupa noted that the dismissal of the application to exclude K.Papathanasakis as a witness was expected, since it is a trial clearly political with an evident convergence between the juridical body and the oppressive mechanisms. It is document of official charges which is up in the air and since K.Papathanasakis will testify whatever they transferred to him he cannot be evaluated, thus closes the road for the judges to judge what’s right and what’s wrong. Anyway, she stressed “you are here as political figures and not as judges”. Continuing, P.Roupa accused Papathanasakis of being a murderer and torturer who has a lawsuit pending against him for the murder of a Pakistani immigrant, when he was serving in Nikea police station in 2008, while he was the one who abused and tortured K.Gournas. This is the kind of person that will support this whole corroded list of official charges.
Followed the testimony of Papathanasakis with the judge and prosecutor asking some formal questions, while he provocatively answered most with “I don’t know” or “I don’t remember”, making it impossible for him to give a detailed account about the investigation he carried out. Specifically he claimed that he was present only at two initial surveillances, while for the rest he simply gathered oral statements and not written. When the advocates attacked him saying that ‘when a witness states facts from third party information, they are obliged to name the source of their information’, he answered that he cannot remember the names of his sources because the whole anti-terrorist force was in the operation, which means 100-200 people.
More specifically, to the questions of the prosecutor and judge, Papathanasakis mentioned tha the reason for the surveillances was the clash in Dafni with L.Foundas in the house of which they found a phonecard from which two phonecalls had been made to two specific numbers which belong to N.Maziotis and V.Stathopoulos. Also he testified that in the possession of V.Stathopoulos was found a note with mobile numbers and coded names which belong to S.Nikitopoulos and Ch.Kortesis and only accepted phonecalls from cardphones (payphones). The mobile of S.Nikitopoulos had not received any calls while the other mobile was not even found in the possession of Ch.Cortesis. In the trial brief also, of the 149 calls made to the latter mobile, only 15 were recorded, those made from a cardphone. To G.Rahiotis question why this happened, Papathanasakis said that the rest of the calls were not considered important. Obviously though the recording of the other calls was not in the interest of Papathanasakis and his service, because the theory that the mobile phone had a conspiratorial function, would collapse immediately. As for the person who listen to the calls live, Papathanasakis does not remember who it was.
Another point on which the advocates focused on was the meeting in Kesariani. According to the testimony of Papathanasakis, from a phone discussion that took place on 31/3/2010, the service was very legitimately lead to the conclusion that the organization is preparing a hit and characterized the meeting in Kesariani conspiratorial, because N.Mazitotis left the car far away and wore sunglasses to the meeting point. He hid of course the fact that the meeting took place in the mornig, that the accused V.Stathopoulos, S.Nikitopoulos and Ch.Cortesis had parked the their car and motorbikes in the parking lot next to the meeting point, that they stood at the parking lot for a minute and spoke in public view and nothing conspiratorial took place at that meeting.
Quite pressing was advocate M.Daliani concerning the testimony of Papathanasakis according to which V.Stathopoulos on 5/4/2010 went towards Hymitos to a deserted area, in which gunshots were later heard. After a little while V.Stathopoulos left and after an investigation they found bullet shells, which were not identified with the guns, which means that he went there to practise shooting. The advocate presented a document of the autopsy report that mentions that this specific incident took place on 11/4/2010, while V.Stathopoulos had already been arrested since 9/4/2010. To the question of the advocate how this could have happened, Papathanasakis answered that its the first time he notices the contradiction.
Especially contradicting was also the evidence he gave concerning the surveillance of the home of V.Stathopoulos on Likourgou street, which he named a lair. According the report of his inferiors, V.Stathopoulos and Ch.Kortesis left the house on Likourgou street and with a motorbike head to the house of comrade V.Stathopoulos where the latter gets off. After a couple of hours Ch.Kortesis comes out of the house on Likourgou street, without anyone noticing him going in again, this time accompanied by N.Maziotis where they get into a renault megane. According to police information, the car had Audi licence plates and had been stolen inThessaloniki. To the question of the advocates how could Ch.Kortesis come out twice from the house, while seen going in just once, Papathanasakis answered that probably it is an omission of the police officers who preformed the surveillance, without of course naming the officers.
A particular interest was presented by a series of questions by the advocates whether if during the surveillance they collected evidence for individual actions.
To questions such as:
‘Did they realize the access of some of the accused to the houses named as “lairs” during the surveillance?’
‘During the surveillance of the phones did someone get traced live planning a punishable act?’
‘Was one of the accused traced making a call from a cardphone?’
‘Were fingerprints of the accused found in any of the houses “lairs”, guns or cars?
‘What punishable act results from the meeting in a public place of some people who have friendly relations or from the visit of a person to friends or relatives house?’
the answers of Papathanasakis were negative, stressing that the only punishable act that took place was the use of a stolen car and that their arrest took place for preventive reasons.
G.Rahiotis insisted especially on the fact that the American embassy had put a bounty of $1.000.000 on Revolutionary Struggle and addressing the witness asked if he received that money. Papathanasakis answered that he knows nothing about money and if the advocate wants he can address the American embassy to find out. Finally the advocate revealed that during the holding of Ch.Kortesis in GADA (central police headquarters of Athens), the latter weirdly denied the use of his advocate while the advocate himself insistently asked to see him for 2 days, but they wouldn’t allow him to. Papathanasakis provocatively answered once more answered that he is not aware that this happened.
The trial will continue on Monday 12/12/2011 where Papathanasakis will be examined by the rest of the advocates.
translation by boubourAs/Actforfreedomnow!


The sixth session of the trial of the Revolutionary Struggle began with the statement of the public prosecutor concerning the objection that had been placed by the advocates regarding the invalidity of the testimony of witness K. Papathanasakis, since he has preformed preliminary interrogating duties.
Specifically the public prosecutor mentioned that K. Papathanasakis did not record the discussions, he was not the one which ordered the lifting of telephone call secrecy, but the public prosecutor, neither signed the interrogative manuscripts that are in the trial brief. Just the submission of preliminary material from a third person, the surveillance of the perpetrator, taking the fingerprints do not constitute interrogative actions. “Besides if Papathanasakis does not testify, who coordinated the investigations, who will testify as a witness in this trial?”, stressed the public prosecutor.
Advocate M. Daliani spoke of a case of a gross mistake and an unlawful choice to send an employee that not only has auxiliary duties but coordinated and directed all the actions. The particular witness stressed M. Daliani should be excluded because a) he is the head of a department and since that self appointed preliminary investigation reached the criminological service, this would obviously be undertaken by the superior in the hierarchy, b) from the result of the trial depends his service development, c) the lifting of the secrecy can be ordered by the public prosecutor, the responsible however preliminary authority is the one which makes the demand is the public prosecutor and asks of his subordinates to proceed to the lifting of secrecy and laboratory examinations, d) finally, the witness does not testify real incidents that they have fallen in his perception. He simply comments the results of the preliminary investigation. He does therefore what is prohibited by a preliminary investigation employee.
Then A. Paparousou addressing the judges asked: “Does this brief really need a narrator or does it have all the sufficient evidence in order for you to get to the truth? ” This particular witness appeared with a transfer from another service with a purpose to dissolve R.S. It is therefore legitimate to say that he will act with prejudice in the effort to support his work.
P. Roumeliotis claimed that the public prosecutor transferred the matter from the interrogative actions to the testimonies, while the latter, mentioned also that K.Papathanasakis has not signed any reports. Here however exists a misapprehension. According to the law the reports on the interrogative actions do not constitute unique interrogative actions. Hence is not raised the possibility for K. Papathanasakis to preform an interrogative actions. Why did the legislator say that the preliminary interrogator shouldn’t participate? Is it not the position and the material rewards that lead him to prejudice?
The functional identity of a head of a department constitutes undeniably an interrogative action, added D. Vagianou. The acceptance of the specific witness establishes the catalysis of every right and freedom, since he himself has proceeded to record activities and cross-correlation of data of personal character.
D.Katsaris spoke of the protection of the correct operation of a fair trial. He stressed that the judges should judge only based on legal evidence and not be influenced by individuals that have interests. If they believe that the witness is qualified to testify, then they should also call all those who participated in the preliminary procedure. “Which is the preliminary action if not the carrying out of preliminary investigation”, was the question placed by advocate
H. Ladis to the judges and continued “Unique preliminary actions are only the arrests of the defendants and the confiscation of their personal belongings? ”
S. Fitrakis finally, gave particular stress to the fact that no executive of DAEEB testified in the trials of 17N and RPS, only real witnesses. The court he said is realizing a “modern” trial. With this logic, stressed ironically S. Fytrakis, it is not essential for all these witnesses of the official charge to testify, all you need is 2 or 3 officers of the anti-terrorist that have done all the investigations and have all the evidence. “Why do you call the one that asked the authorization for the lifting of telephone secrecy and do you not call the one that heard the dialogues of the conversations?” he asked the judges.
After an interruption of an hour and a half the public prosecutor rejected the objection saying that the actions of K. Papathanasakis do not constitute an interrogative action, but under his duties, therefore he can be examined as a witness.
Because K. Papathanasakis was absent because of an illness, the chairman proposed the continuation of the procedure with the next witnesses, something which however did not become acceptable from the advocates.
Thus the trial was interrupted and will continue on 28.11.11 at 9:00am, where is expected to testify as the first witness K. Papathanasakis.

Assembly of solidarity
to the imprisoned and persecuted fighters


Are you going to have a trial with witnesses or with proof of evidence the scenario of the Anti-terrorist force?

This is the essential question faced by the terror-court of Koridallos, before the hearing begins with the examination of the prosecution witnesses. Legally, this question took the form of a dispute from the side of the defence with the examination as a witness of Kostandinos Papathanasiou, officer of the Police, head of the 1st Department of Internal Security of the Management and Facing of Special Crimes of Violence,(ΔΑΕΕΒ) as is the formal service name of the infamous Anti-terrorist force.

We will try to explain as simply as possible the substance of the matter put, in order for all those who are not acquainted with legal matters to realize it.

The Code of Penal Law, -not only the existing one, but the one that was in force before 1950- forbids to examine as witnesses anyone who has been involved in the interrogations for the case in matter. This is a main protection of the rights of the defendant, because these specific people have knowledge of the case and have formed, to one degree or another, the frame in which this case got to court to be tried. Hence, it is considered from the start that they are not outspoken witnesses, but have an opinion for the case and the defendants (does not matter if its for or against). Beyond the formed opinion they have, many times they also have a personal interest from the outcome of the case according to the frame which themselves, as interrogating or preliminary employees, have formed. A police officer, for example, does not want a case which he/she “set up”to be proven a fiasco and that is why as a witness they will act with prejudice for the the case he/she “set up”. As a small guarantee therefore, article 211 of the Code of Penal Law forbids witnesses who have had interrogating or preliminary duties in the case, to testify. There is, actually, a legislation that forbids even secretaries of preliminary interrogations to testify as witnesses, let alone people who had the responsibility of the “set up”of a case, such as the cop in question.

Lets see, therefore, what goes for the specific officer, as described with numerous details from the defence advocates.

M.Daliani presented the legal frame in which are based the objections of the defence. Article 211 of the C.P.L. forbids witnesses to testify who have practised interrogating duties, because suspicions of prejudice and defending of service interests arise, article 33 of the C.P.L. defines who are those who practised interrogating duties, clearly defining that interrogating duty is also every action that took place in the frame of the preliminary interrogation. Only the preliminary interrogator has knowledge of the trial brief, while those foreign to the interrogation have no right to gain knowledge (therefore, the knowledge of Papathanasakis is knowledge of the preliminary interrogator). The preliminary interrogation for the specific case began from the Department of Criminal Prosecution against Life in GADA (Athens police headquarters), after the death of Lambros Foundas, while the next day already the 1st Department of Internal Terrorism of the DAEEB took over, head of which is Papathanasakis. This is shown clearly from the stamps on the official documents. Papathanasakis collected all of the material, he gave the order to the Service of Criminal Investigations (police labs) to collect and investigate of numerous proof, he asked for the lifting of the secrecy of some phone lines, he informed the interrogator, he signs the whole of the lists with the evaluation of findings when the trial brief was transferred to the public prosecutor. He, himself gave a preliminary testimony in which he did not bring any proof of evidence, went ahead however to an evaluation of all material. He also testified to the special appeals prosecutor, where he even asked to use his notes so he does not forget anything. He seems to have such detailed knowledge, because he is the preliminary interrogator as the head of the department that preformed it. For this, he has a service interest to claim that his version is the right one. It is characteristic that he is the only one of the prosecution witnesses who refers to some of the defendants, such as for example Stathopoulos. This is why he should be excluded.

Anny Paparoussou continued, and read out Papathanasakis testimony, in which is included a large list of preliminary acts in which he participated: he asked for the secrecy lift on specific phone lines, made the evidence chart, made the chart for the documents for the trials brief, made the proof chart, the document of the DAEEB towards the special appeals interrogator etc.etc. Almost all of the trials brief is made by him. He practised preliminary and interrogating duties. He mentioned many incidents, not from his immediate knowledge, interpreting them. He is the one who gave the meaning to the whole case. For Nikitopoulos this meaning is of defining importance. He evaluated two meetings, which anyone could, and called him a member of the organization. He sent the interrogator ready made conclusions under the form of an essay.

The “antiterrorist”legislations have an immediate relation with the matter in discussion, pointed out D. Vagianou. As a result of these legislations was added to the C.P.L., article 253A, that concerns interrogative actions for “terrorism”cases. These interrogative actions were carried out by Papathanasakis as the head in charge. He was the protagonist as an interrogative organ in the interrogating procedures with a political content. He had a managerial task, he was the maestro of the orchestra. It is unacceptable for him to testify, because consciously or subconsciously will try to justify what he did.

P. Roumeliotis returned concisely to the legal matters and described the actions of Papathanasakis, which are these that the CPL defines as interrogating actions. According to the legislation, pointed out the advocate, interrogating employee is even whoever carries out an arrest or the 2nd degree interrogating employee, who simply is present and signs, without doing anything, let alone he who coordinates everything. The ratio of the law says that the specific employee open to any kind of pressures and will not be objective. Papathanasakis does not simply mention incidents, but makes conclusions that lead specific accused to condemnation. For example, he penalizes a meeting. From the outcome of this case he hopes for a better professional evolution, without forgetting that in these cases there are major ethical and professional benefits, there are bounties, which means economic gains. If Papathanasakis testifies, then there will be a tear away from the values of a ‘fair trial’, as defined by article 6 of the European Convention for Human Rights.

H. Ladis noted that all the pre-trial demands that were rejected by the court. In some of them there was a legal base, as for example the objection for the political offence, while in this case it does not exist. The forbidding of article 211 of the CPL is a foundational lawful forbidding, which has been applied throughout time. Based on this even the secretary of the interrogation is excluded from being a witness and this is an answer to the legitimate protest of every defendant that there is prejudice against them. In this case, the witness is the basic figure of the prejudice. He became a witness, because he has never been a witness in anything and simply makes a mixture, transforming into a testimony anything that has been gathered, in order to create a specific image against specific defendants. What will we say to the defendants that claim that they have across them the whole mechanism? Why did they not 4-5 cops as witnesses, if there were, that can testify what they realized first hand? Why do they bring the second hand and not those who allegedly mentioned things to Papathanasakis? If you reject this self-explanatory demand, he continued, it would as if you hope that soon this legislation section will be abolished. In the meantime, there will be a major blow to the feeling of justice that every citizen has.

Laconic K. Dailianas, agreed with his pre spoken colleagues and noted that from the content of the two testimonies of Papathanasakis it comes out that he testifies nothing as his own knowledge, but whatever he learnt from his service as a interrogative employee.

From the above, we think its clear what this is about. We note that it is about a turn in the tactic of the Anti-terrorist. In the trials of the 17N and R.P.S not even a nostril of ‘anti-terrorist’ appeared to testify. Only two officers appeared at the second trial of R.P.S, to ‘empty’ the fake witness that testified he ‘recognized’ G.Serifis in an action of R.P.S. In Perissos. They wanted to ‘empty’ him, because the scenario of the Anti-terrorist had placed G.Serifis in 17N and not R.P.S. and the fake witness spoiled their scenario. When they were asked in the trial generally about the case, they denied to answer, claiming the specific forbidding legislation (they had practised preliminary interrogation duties)! The same answer was given by judges and prosecutors to the defence advocates in both of these trials, who asked to summon officers of the Anti-terrorist to testify: we cannot summon them because they have practised preliminary duties and is forbidden by article 211 of the CPL. They raised a protective wall around the officers of the Anti-terrorist, because they considered they can fulfil these trials with other “proof” (in the 17N case with the “confessions” and those who cooperated, in the RPS case with the “Stazi archives” and three civilian fake witnesses.

In the current trial of R.S. they had no other way to “tie up” some of the defendants beyond the “material” of the Anti-terrorist. This is why they assigned to the responsible head of the department to create a scenario and present it. They consider that he can mange in the court room, contrary to those who carried out the surveillances. This is the substance. They want to do the trial using as a main witness the script writer of the Anti-terrorist, tearing up one of the fundamental provisions of the existing legislation system and inaugurating a new period, during which they will bring a Anti-terrorist officer as a specialist and the scenario which he will present will be taken as indisputable proof.

After the allocutions of the advocates, the trial was interrupted until next Monday (21st), in order for the allocution of S.Fitrakis absent because of illness. The other defence advocates had applied for a interruption from the beginning of the procedure.

translate by boubourAs/actforfreedomnow!

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Athens: Anarchists detained en mass after solidarity intervention in a commercial radio station for the Revolutionary Struggle case trial


In the morning of January 10th, nearly twenty members of the solidarity assembly for the case of Revolutionary Struggle (Epanastatikos Agonas, whose trial is currently underway) entered the corporate radio station flash.gr on Kifisias Avenue and interrupted the station’s program, to transmit a message of solidarity with those on trial.
Despite the fact that neither the station’s management, nor its staff asked officially any police intervention, scores of police (DIAS motorcycle units, squads such as MAT, plainclothes cops, among others) soon arrived on the spot and encircled the building. At about 14.00, after hours of being blocked inside the radio’s offices, anarchists who took part in the solidarity intervention were detained en mass and taken to the police headquarters on Alexandras Avenue: two prosecutors along with police squads stormed the radio station, forcing the comrades to exit the premises; all were handcuffed and held in police buses, while their mobile phones were confiscated.
As soon as the news was circulated, anarchists gathered opposite the police HQ (GADA), where a solidarity protest of approximately 100 people is underway (pre-gathering point: outside Ambelokipi metro station).
Here’s a text released by the 20 detainees themselves:
Today, January 10th, 2012, comrades from the anarchist/anti-authoritarian space carried out an intervention in the corporate radio station Flash 96 FM in the context of a series of solidarity actions for the Revolutionary Struggle case, which was brought to trial since October 5th, 2011, in the special court of Koridallos prisons.
We have taken this action in an effort to break the wall of silence and the political order to gag the trial process and the political discourse of the defendants in the Revolutionary Struggle case.
A confirmation of this gagging was the immediate reaction of police forces during the broadcast of our audio message with the words of the prosecuted for the same case. This mobilization of the executive and law enforcement authorities is indicative for anyone who resists, for whoever puts forward the total overthrow of the system through the social revolution, which is the only way to escape from the modern totalitarianism of the Troika of EU, ECB and IMF and their trustee, the Greek State, that have submitted the entire society in poverty and misery.
A society doomed by the full dismantling of labour relations, the ‘chinesization’ in front of the threat of more and more unemployed people lining up in long queues, the onslaughts of predatory taxation, the dissolution of public-benefit corporations, the privatizations, the selling off of public assets and the development of financial zones on starvation wages.
It is worth noting that under this treaty, in their bid to shield the system, and while everything is reduced and cut, the only thing that’s increased are the armies of the watchdogs of democracy, armed guards, capitalism and its State. Therefore, under this treaty, more commonly referred to as Junta, we are in solidarity and proud with our comrades and their choices.
Our choices are side by side with all parts of society who choose the fair way of social liberation.
Solidaritarians’ assembly from inside Flash radio station

Solidarity banner opposite Athens police HQ: ‘Down your limbs from the fighters! We are all terrorists!’
Although it is most likely that the station’s owners or even its security guards had notified some authorities about the presence of anarchists in the building, it has been reported that all detainees were charged in ex officio indictment, meaning that no call from the company’s staff was required for the prosecutors and cops to invade in it. Initially, it was feared that the charges may fall under Greece’s third terrorism law. It seems though that all comrades are charged with the misdemeanor of ‘incitement to violence’. They are now threatened to be held in detention and stand trial tomorrow, 11/1, at Evelpidon courts in Athens, at about 12.00. We call for their unconditional acquittal!
No prosecution for the comrades who intervened in Flash 96 FM!
Freedom now to all!
Solidarity with the three members of Revolutionary Struggle, Nikos Maziotis, Pola Roupa, Kostas Gournas, and the other defendants in the same case, Vaggelis Stathopoulos, Sarantos Nikitopoulos, Christoforos Kortesis, Marie Beraha and Kostas Katsenos. We demand the immediate release of K.Katsenos who is still held hostage under pre-trial detention.


Ongoing gathering outside Athens police headquarters,
on Alexandras Avenue, from 17.30
Ongoing PA’s counter-information gathering
at Kamara, Thessaloniki, from 18.30
sources: a, b, c, d, e, f

2 comments to Athens: Anarchists detained en mass after solidarity intervention in a commercial radio station for the Revolutionary Struggle case trial

  • Update, Wednesday, January 11th, 11.26 GMT+2
    Due to the refusal of the arrested comrades to give their fingerprints, they will be probably transferred earlier than expected at Evelpidon courts, Athens.
  • Contra Info
    Latest update, Wednesday, January 11th:
    All 20 comrades have now been released. Still, they will be facing trial (on Friday, January, 13th).

Friday, January 6, 2012

Responsibility claim for the arsons of the Tax Offices of Pagrati and Glifada.- Athens

And I ask the economists, the politicians, the moralisers: did they ever calculate the number of people who obligatorily are convicted to decadence, to unequal work, to shabbiness, to corrupted ignorance, to unbeatable infelicity, to absolute destitution in order to produce a rich person?”

Almeida Garrett

We take responsibility for the arsons, in the early hours of Saturday 26/11 and Tuesday 29/11, in the:
-Tax offices of Pagrati, on Damareos street
-Tax offices of Glifada, on Gounari street

We placed the incendiary mechanisms on the inside of the buildings aiming at as much material damage as possible.

The global economic-political system transforms testing its totalitarian possibilities. We are living the end of the “social state” with the passing into an even more vicious capitalism without limits and rules. The generalized systemic crisis is not an accidental incident, but a situation of capitalism itself. The procedure with which the capital was invested all the previous years, with the so-called money products (bonds, CDS e.t.c) was proven precarious. This fact was unavoidable, since lending creates money, which does not correspond to a rise of the economic base, that is to say, the production of the proportional product, to which the money would correspond. Thus, the managers of large capitals are in the unfavourable position to have tied up a large part of their wealth not in material goods, but in a promise of money. By trying to secure their wealth, they blackmail and extract the dominating rights in public and state fortune, coming to the point of attacking also the private fortunes of the citizens. 

In the Greece of 2011 the repeatedly memorandums and the lending conventions consist the official grave stone of whatever social and work conquests, the abolition of every meaning and pretext of the “welfare state”. Thus comes the end of the feigned prosperity and “frantic development” of the dogma of modernization of the ’90s and the beginning of the ’00s. 

The fiestas of uplifting the “national ideal” of the Olympics and the vision of the “powerful Greece” give way to the fear of proletarianization, with capitalism, under the weight of its dead-ends, taking away the crumbs it gave out. With the mechanisms of guidance, as always, in full function. The relaxation in the stadiums and the consumption of cheap (or expensive…) lifestyle. With the reduction of self-interest to a social goods, with the customer relations and the give-and-taking with the political authority, was conserved the invention of a fabricated thriving middle class. An apathetic identical social formation where the biggest piece of it did not see or did not want to see the evident. That the informal ‘Omerta’ with the system, which exploits it, steps on borrowed and hollow foundations. The previous years, going through the streets of the city you noticed a society, which in its majority watched self-consciously its bloodsucking compared to the cannibalism imposed on it. Henceforth the cuts on wages and pensions, the added taxes, will form a more and more asphyxiating daily life for everyone. The instinct of self-preservation is activated and a social angry outburst is now in evolving, creating thin balances between the fatalistic moaning and the factual expression of disobedience. The passing of the systemic crisis over our backs puts every person in front of the responsibilities of their own dignity. The course is definitely not predestined. The shady cloud of dispute hovers above the political system. 

The regime of urban democracy seeing the contract of social peace and subjugation slowly and steadily getting wrinkled, resorts to the pre-decided choice of a government of cooperation and complicity. Hoping it will function as a de-pressure valve, for the achievement of a inter-class consent through cries for national coil and multiple blackmails. A right to the pie of authority is for all traditional parliamentary political forces who are willing to completely harmonize with the orders of the global economic elite. The coup d’ etat model of the technocratic governing signals the “end of history”, with the pushing aside of ideologies, putting under its umbrella fake social-democrats up to the fascists of LAOS (populist orthodox formation).
In reality its aim is now clear and without pretexts rising of the capital to a legislative coordinator.

The united interests of the urban class and their expressers go through the economic junta of the omnipotence of the banks, the squeezing of individual production possibility, the economic annihilation of the non-privileged, the reduction of freedoms and the legal and military armouring of the frame of oppression. The dignity of existence is expressed with violent rupture, resistance in the working places, the barricades of the strikes, from the not discounted refusal of the existing way of things and the stomping of ruling ethics. 

Revolutionary violence is the chariot of social liberation and revolutionary conscience the fuel which will move it. The crisis is for the system an “opportunity for reformation” or otherwise a bullet, that aims at its forehead as long as a capable collective subject is found to pull the trigger. The objective conditions of today immediately put the matter of the search and acceleration of the means for the uprooting of authoritarian-exploitative relations, aiming at the construction of relations of solidarity-equality of tomorrow, the emersion of an un-mediated anti-capitalist front from the bottom which will cross over to the multiform attack. It is imperative henceforth, that we set up horizontal structures and procedures, which will accompany the practices that promote the revolution. The moment the state mechanisms will come to impose the antisocial measures of their local and international bosses, they fall onto the bulwark of solidarity of the oppressed. With the populist assemblies, wild strikes, the antifascist struggle, the night-time raids, sabotages, armed struggle, a radical front is composed which aims at the destruction of modern totalitarianism which is imposed on our lives. 

The only solution for the passing into a society of equality where there will be no exploitation of human by humans is the SOCIAL REVOLUTION.

We dedicate our attacks to the anarchist comrades P.Roupa, N.Maziotis, K.Gournas who have taken the political responsibility for the R.O. Revolutionary Struggle and to the anarchist comrades S.Nikitopoulos, Ch.Kortesis, V.Stathopoulos, K.Katsenos as well as M.Beraha who are tried for the same case. 


We are next to all the comrades who stand with dignity and continue to fight inside the prison. 

Revolutionary Counter attack

Attack on Lloyds bank depot-BRISTOL UK


At 4:30 am on Thursday 15th of december we attacked Bristol LLoyds bank depot
in solidarity with comrades imprisoned in Greece, Chile, Switherland and all over
the world. We painted the message “UNTIL ALL ARE FREE” on the building and positioned
three bins of flamable material soaked in gazoline in front of their wooden doors
and set them alight. Unfortunately our attempt to burn the building down was scuppured
by fast emergency services response.
We took this action to send our love and Solidarity to our Revolutionary Struggle
comrades on trial in Greece and to the Chillean comrades persecuted for the “bomb case” ,
also to Silvia, Costa and Billy the Swiss comrades persecuted for “IBM nanotechnology building”
and for all those Imprisoned for their political beliefs.

anarchists individuals/ cells of FAI

Grete-xania-Poster Solidarity to the persecuted for the case of the revolutionary struggle

translate by boubourAs/Actforfreedomnow!

Freedom to all imprisoned fighters

The campaign of modern savagery crushes every aspect of social life, intensifying the shabbiness of the “under” of this world.

On the other camp, parts of society who do not subjugate, do not consent in the plans of authority, choose to counter attack, through the speech and actions, involved in the multiform social struggles.

The guaranteeing of the privileged of this world, demands the elimination of anyone who disturbs the smoothness of our exploit. In the foresight the militant social struggles and the fighters.

Right now in the cells of the regime there are about 40 fighters while dozens more are persecuted, because of their clear position of battle which they chose against the rulers.

The target of authority is to demean and de-politicize the whatever subversive choices, seeking to identify socially the factual revolutionary/social counter-violence with actions of the common penal code, in their attempt to isolate and anticipate the dissemination of these choices into fighting social part. And despite that institutionally they are not recognized as political prisoners, the vengeance and special treatment (terrorlaw, special confinement conditions, special courts) saved for them, proves the exact opposite.

Solidarity to the persecuted for the case of the revolutionary struggle
Within these frames is included the trial for the case of the Revolutionary Struggle which began on the 5th of October. The fighters P.Roupa, K.Gournas and N.Maziotis have taken the political responsibility for the action of the organization and V.Stathopoulos, Ch.Kortesis, S.Nikitopoulos, M.Beraha and K.Katsenos are accused because of the penalization of their comradely or family relations and their anarchist action.

The memory of anarchist Lambros Foundas, murdered member of the Revolutionary Struggle in an armed conflict with the cops, will accompany us in the struggles.

We should deepen the rupture with every form of authority

for a world without hierarchies, oppression and exploit

for the social revolution and liberation

Hania december 2011
assembly of anarchists/anti-authoritarians “saltadoroi”

Ravenna, Italy: vehicles damaged in solidarity with comrades and struggles

Received from anonymous email

Translated from informa-azione  by B.pd/actforfreedomnow

In the night between 19th and 20th November, with the help of a thick fog, we individuated and hit 12 vehicles, among which:
- 7 cars of ENI, a company that exports death and destruction.
- 3 SUV luxury cars.
- 1 car of CMC, a company also involved in the TAV.
- 1 limousine.
We punctured all tyres.
We want to dedicate this action to:
1) Tortuga.
2) All the Chilean comrades on trial for the Bombas case.
3) Gabriela, still on hiding.
4) Silvia, Costa, Billy.
5) Marco Camenish.
6) Eat & Billy.
7) Tamara.
8) All the arrested and not arrested comrades of the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire.
9) All the arrested and not arrested comrades of Revolutionary Struggle.
10) All the comrades who struggle inside and outside prison.
11) All the peoples in struggle against the devastation of the earth (for example in Nigeria or in Val Susa).
12) All the comrades fallen while fighting in order to destroy the misery in which we live.

Athens: Solidarity gathering for the Revolutionary Struggle case

'The insurgents are right'
with the members of REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE
and all those who are prosecuted for the same case
The call for the solidarity gathering
The case of social liberation within a revolutionary perspective is always current because the chains of the repressed of this decayed world will only break if we fight by all means.
All the subversive purposes ought to get organized in common without creating matters of division within the struggle for the social liberation. It is important to realize that the means used for the overthrow of the current system are choices that all converge in the same direction.
The armed struggle is a radical form of struggle and should be analyzed as such. It is another choice within the polymorphous action of the revolutionary and radical movement, since it propels the actual and direct confrontation against the state and its mechanisms of exploitation.
The comrades that are prosecuted for the case of the Revolutionary Struggle continue to give meaning to the struggle with their speech and criticism for the overthrow of the State and Capitalism inside and outside the cells of democracy and courts.
Assembly for the case of Revolutionary Struggle
sources 1, 2

Chania, Crete: Solidarity poster by saltadoroi

Greece: Communiqué of political prisoners who abstain from prison food in solidarity with anarchist Stella Antoniou

The last two years, the number of political prisoners in the prisons of the Greek State has increased rapidly, while dozens of activists of all tendencies have been arrested, accused either for participation in the revolutionary organizations that were active in the previous period, or for their general anti-systemic action.
One of those is Stella Antoniou, who was arrested on December 4th, 2010. The anarchist comrade was already facing a serious health problem, which has dangerously worsened during the last year of her incarceration. On January 4th, 2012, she will submit an application for release from prison, in order to receive the appropriate medical care before her condition becomes irreversible.
As a minimum act of solidarity, we have started from today, December 30th, 2011, an abstention from prison meals, which will last until the date of her application submission for release —on January 4th, 2012.
Polykarpos Georgiadis, Giannis Dimitrakis, Giorgos Karagiannidis, Konstantina Karakatsani, Kostas Katsenos, Christos Kolentinis, Dimitris Koufontinas, Alexandros Mitroussias, Kostas Sakkas, Rami Syrianos, Dimitris Fessas

Due to delayed communication, the comrade Simos Seisidis is not able to participate in the abstention, but he supports the protest action.
Also, Stella Antoniou abstains from prison food.

Other inmates of the 2nd wing of Corfu prisons who abstain from prison food are: Stamatis Achtsalotidis, Theofilos Lazarakis, Alexandér Bani, Christos Loupa, Michalis Devenes (along with Polykarpos Georgiadis who co-signs the above statement).
Hour by hour, there are more declarations of abstention from prison food in solidarity with Stella Antoniou. In particular, the anarchist prisoners of war Giannis Skouloudis, Sokratis Tzifkas, Dimitris Dimtsiadis and Babis Tsilianidis explain in their communiqué:
[...] On January 4th a hearing will be held regarding a new application for release submitted by the comrade Stella Antoniou, who is already one year under pre-trial detention in Koridallos women’s prisons. We want to make clear that we stand on the side of Stella and we claim her immediate release from prison, therefore we will abstain from prison meals from December 30th to January 4th. On the same day (4/1) the members of the R.O. Conspiracy of Cells of Fire Damiano Bolano, Gerasimos Tsakalos, Christos Tsakalos, Michalis Nikolopoulos, Giorgos Nikolopoulos, Giorgos Polidoros, Olga Ekonomidou, Haris Hadjimihelakis, Panagiotis Argirou, as well as the anarchists Giorgos Karagiannidis, Alexandros Mitroussias, Kostas Sakkas, Christos Politis and Dimitris Michail are called to appear before the Appellate Judges Council [of Athens] in order to be decided who and on what charges will be brought to trial in relation to the arrests of December 4th, 2010, and the incendiary parcels sent to European Union organizations and foreign embassies. [...]
Sources: 1, 2