The IRTR's response on the question of the individual Mousnonya reveals that the enemy has walked all over the proletariat at IRTR. We are telling any sincere individuals passing through IRTR that the proletariat is not in control there.
IRTR suddenly claims it does not allow anyone to claim it is IRTR off-line and threatens suit in connection to information revealed about that. Our readers need to think hard why that became necessary. It's an admission that IRTR is tied up with the death threat networks MIM has been talking about in connection to Ward Churchill.
The real problem is what IRTR allows on-line. The IRTR initiated as a break-away from MIM starting discussions against RCP=CIA that MIM did not want to have in public.
Now even taking IRTR's own approach at face-value, Mousnonya was previously in a lapsed period of activism as long as subject to the Web Minister's discipline. Next IRTR popped up counter to MIM's authoritarian wish not to discuss line with random people. As a result, Mousnonya becomes enabled. Working under MIM discipline, Mousnonya was not a problem. Allowed to speak out on IRTR, Mousnonya becomes a problem of monumental proportions.
So then IRTR takes a line against Mousnonya and even calls MIM "revisionist" just on that basis, the line of one individual. That's quite a neat trick--enabling the "revisionism" and then blaming it on MIM. Mousnonya had no public place to spread his problems before IRTR existed.
Mousnonya next goes through a period working under de facto RMP discipline as our Art Minister--again accomplishing almost nothing but also posing no problem in that context. When RMP folded its web page that Mousnonya was working on, MIM said Mousnonya was moot--which he was in terms of anything MIM controlled. Mousnonya had no way to contribute work to either etext.org or RMP anymore. It's hard to take people at IRTR complaining about Mousnonya seriously when they did not notice that. This includes anyone doing a quarter-assed job following MIM's structure. It's an example why full-time spies have an easy time of fouling up the proletarian struggle.
So the summary of IRTR's handling of Mousnonya is that IRTR found it worthy of slinging the "revisionism" word, but when we ask IRTR what it did about Mousnonya, mostly the result is hurl some words at MIM to cover itself. Now it justifies not doing what I asked in my last note. So on the one hand, IRTR wants us to be responsible for Mousnonya, but when I ask IRTR to take responsibility for what Mousnonya did at IRTR, there is evasion.
Yes, it has to be noted that in a sense of certain words pertaining to theory and history, IRTR earns the "A+." Yet overall, the proletarian camp is being walked on at the IRTR. This is a question of raising the bar. If you cannot see it, sorry, but next time.
MIM ran a forum before at Yahoo and undertook similar ventures elsewhere. From practice we know that there are simply too many state agents and their parasite "left" collaborators to hold a forum discussion. The "freedom" is bullshit until you have enough "possessed" comrades able to carve out a place of operation. It's both that the enemy takes MIM seriously and there is plenty of money available to run forums to initiate provocations against MIM.
To run a forum like IRTR requires someone reading every day, alert, with a good memory and able to predict the likelihood of where various lines are coming from and why in certain strange combinations--fraud control. Without that, a discussion forum becomes a place to spy and start serious provocations. That is not MIM's fault, simply reality about the ratio of proletarian-minded people to state agents.